VSL Pro Demos [Archive] - Northern Sound Source

falcon1

07-22-2003, 02:26 AM

I checked the new user demos from Maarten and Sharmy.

I must say that these are very good, however I\'m missing the space and room which I often feel in real (good) recordings - I found that first from the EWQLSO demo, which had the space I expect from real recordings.

Anyway, so we talk some more about individual instruments of VSL.

Piccalo trumpet - I\'m little disapointed with the sound of P. trumpet, it is too thin and narrow.

C-trumpet - Same problem as with the P. trumpet, but not as much. And the runs and trills are great.

Horn in F - It\'s very good.

Percussion - I find that I\'m not very happy with that section, it\'s too little power and strength in the sound. Maybe it\'s the mixing or something?

Enough for now.

Garius

07-22-2003, 05:31 AM

Hi,

I have been listening to the VSL DEMO\'s, They are very nice, both from a sample POV and of course some fine writing. IT is very inspirational. I have been struggling along with the AO library. <hehe> I find myself writing more for my best samples instead of an open pallette. Until I have a more extensive library this is the best solution. I do have SOV and that helps a lot.

Does Maarten have a web-site of his work? I\'d be interested in learning more about his background and rig. To my ears, he\'s really nailing it. Sharmy is doing a great job too!

Garius Hill

Maarten Spruijt

07-22-2003, 05:46 AM

Thanks all! I appreciate it.
Making \'Traincatcher\' was a lot of fun.

Garius, my .com is down at the moment, hope to put it back up again soon. However, I have a mirror site right here (\"http://www2.hku.nl/~maarte2/index.html\").

Thanks for your interest!

Best,

Maarten

P de Caumette

07-22-2003, 06:24 AM

Maarten, love your work. This demo is fantastic.

I was wondering about what reverb type and settings you used for your orchestra?

Bravo.

Craig, like your demos too. Pretty good for a jazz guitarist images/icons/wink.gif

Rob Elliott

07-22-2003, 07:14 AM

As I mentioned on the VSL board - these two composers really show off the Library nicely. Way to go guys.

I too, was a little dissappointed with the solo cello.

One very bright spot for me was Vienna\'s new demo of the \"pro editiion\" solo vln with the ensemble. Absolutely the best \'string section sound I have heard - IMHO\'. It\'s so good that I may not need to hire a solo violinist to \'double\' my string sections on an upcoming project. Take a listen to this and share your thoughts.

Rob

Jazzhole

07-22-2003, 07:17 AM

Marteen *Bookmarked* =)

Cheers

Dietz

07-22-2003, 01:29 PM

Originally posted by falcon1:
I checked the new user demos from Maarten and Sharmy.

I must say that these are very good, however I\'m missing the space and room which I often feel in real (good) recordings - I found that first from the EWQLSO demo, which had the space I expect from real recordings.

Anyway, so we talk some more about individual instruments of VSL.

Piccalo trumpet - I\'m little disapointed with the sound of P. trumpet, it is too thin and narrow.

C-trumpet - Same problem as with the P. trumpet, but not as much. And the runs and trills are great.

Horn in F - It\'s very good.

Percussion - I find that I\'m not very happy with that section, it\'s too little power and strength in the sound. Maybe it\'s the mixing or something?

Enough for now. I\'d say you don\'t like my mixes :-)

I\'m trapped in a dilemma: Would I mix the demos with lots of room, many people would complain about the fact that the demo is \"dishonest\", because so much effect is used. So I try do keep the mixes as dry as possible (well, most of the time), running into the risk of comments like yours.

Bottom line: The Piccolo Trumpet of our library will be as far or as near from your ear as you like it. The choice is up to you; and this is true with every other instrument, too.

BTW - my favorite is the the Harp Solo - I\'m floored by the realism of this performance. And yes, it\'s _very_ dry! ;-)

All the best,

falcon1

07-22-2003, 01:45 PM

Hi Dietz, yes it could be the mixes or just my taste. Anyway, I love a lot of VSL instruments and there are none instruments which sounds bad or really bad but there are some instruments which need some improvements. NB. I\'m judging from the demos!

Like you know from other recent threads I\'ve posted here, I\'m considering buying VSL or EWQLSO. Unfortunately it\'s too big bite to take currently, but hopefully within a year I\'ll have either VSL complete package or EWQLSO complete package.

Btw. I did get the demo cube (isn\'t that the right name?), and I liked working with the bassoon! Unfortunately my computer didn\'t handle the legato stuff well.

peter269

07-22-2003, 03:51 PM

Originally posted by Dietz:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by falcon1:
I\'m trapped in a dilemma: Would I mix the demos with lots of room, many people would complain about the fact that the demo is \"dishonest\", because so much effect is used. So I try do keep the mixes as dry as possible (well, most of the time), running into the risk of comments like yours. <hr /></blockquote>This is a very important SALES POINT for any library. Last year at a program with the Society of Composers and Lyricists in LA, a library demonstration was done and throughout the presentation, composers were literally calling out to turn OFF the reverb so they could hear what the samples sounded like dry.

Of all the private demonstrations given, I\'ve only had ONE (1) composer want to hear VSL with a touch of reverb.

Thomas_J

07-22-2003, 06:17 PM

Great new demos!

Great stuff by Maarten and Sharmy (That\'s definitely hollywood, if you go back 30-40 years in time images/icons/smile.gif I liked it. Nice harmonies. A fresh breath of air after hearing where the film scoring world has been heading the past 5 years or so. Simple harmonies are becoming increasingly dominant in film scores. I suppose it has something to do with the time schedules modern composers are facing.

Anyway, good work!

Thomas

falcon1

07-22-2003, 07:02 PM

Thomas, I could do a very complex 40-60 harmony progression in about 30-40 minutes. Then it\'s just matter of applying some counterpoint and/or texture. If I would be hard pressed I could complete it in about 6 hours + 1 additional hour for checking for errors and such.
I admit that it won\'t be my masterpiece but it will probably sound better than most of the film music today, that\'s if I would have VSL or EWQLSO as my orchestra or better live orchestra. (Ok now I\'ll get toasted! images/icons/grin.gif )

Anyway, my point is that if you know your thing (theory, orchestration etc.) then you can produce a piece, which will blow the average or even the most demanding viewers away, even on tight schedule.

Btw. I intend to back this up when I get my new computer and my orchestra in place. images/icons/wink.gif

Maarten Spruijt

07-22-2003, 11:22 PM

You left out IMAGINATION falcon!! images/icons/wink.gif

If it was just about theory and classical orchestration we could have computers do it for us!

Theory alone doesn\'t make music.

That\'s why conservatories can potentially be such boring places... images/icons/wink.gif Nobody smiles over there (composer\'s section that is).

All the best,

Maarten

Alexcremers

07-22-2003, 11:23 PM

Originally posted by Thomas_J:

Simple harmonies are becoming increasingly dominant in film scores. I suppose it has something to do with the time schedules modern composers are facing.

Thomas Simple harmonies? It\'s the latest trend and it\'s been going on for a while now. The truth is that it\'s meant not to scare or tire people since their acceptance level on complicated harmonies is very low nowadays. Bring on Jerry Fielding and theaters are running empty.

------------
Alex Cremers

Robert Kral

07-22-2003, 11:30 PM

In regard to simple harmonies and today\'s film music, don\'t forget that the composer works for the producer and director.

Most often, there\'s direction given to the composer to write in a certain way. OR ELSE!!

What I am saying is be careful to not always blame the composer: He just has to do his job t the liking of those who hired him.

JonP

07-22-2003, 11:47 PM

Mental lethargy and lake of creative spirit on all sides is responsible if you ask me. Visionless directors unable to see past trends and lazy composers unable or willing to try and make them see other avenues.

Alexcremers

07-22-2003, 11:48 PM

Piccalo trumpet - I\'m little disapointed with the sound of P. trumpet, it is too thin and narrow. That\'s why QLSO is born (ok, almost). I love how the notes are connecting with each other with the legato tool though. It clearly seems to work very well with brass instruments. The Wagner Tuba plays great too.

------------
Alex Cremers

falcon1

07-23-2003, 02:24 AM

Maarten, of course we all need imagination - However, composer which has gone through extensive training in theory etc. is better equipped to deal with tight schedule than composer that didn\'t go through this training.
It\'s like sending untrained warrior to fight with trained warrior, who\'s more likely to win?
However Maarten, you\'re right that theory alone doesn\'t make music but it sure can give you a good jump start. images/icons/wink.gif
Hmmm... I\'m smiling all the time. images/icons/grin.gif

Alex, it\'s true that the pop culture has somewhat damaged the people senses for good and/or interesting harmonies. However, the work around is to hide the chords, which people aren\'t used to, and let them ask the question \"why was that so intense and/or interesting?\". Also, even though I\'m talking about very complex harmonies that doesn\'t mean that I\'m talking atonal.

Robert, that\'s true however it\'s possible or should be possible for the composer to vary the style.

JonP, true it isn\'t just the composers fault. However, if you look at the background of many of today\'s film composers you will see that many doesn\'t have the necessary (formal) theory knowledge to be able to justify that or this change. With knowledge in theory and music history you can justify with more reason than you can otherwise, and therefore it\'s likely that you manage to convince the producer etc. that your change or something else will work great for this or that scene.

Like always, Knowledge is Power! images/icons/wink.gif

Alexcremers

07-23-2003, 02:57 AM

Give the people what they want. Give them what they expect. Composers are forced into making scores that sound familiar to the public so when the movie starts they feel right at home without knowing why. As a composer you just cannot play around with a $100 million budget movie. Do as we tell you and you\'ll be fine. I love music but it is music that makes me fall asleep whilst watching a movie.
Knowledge is power? No! The audience is the power!

------------
Alex Cremers

Markus S

07-23-2003, 03:15 AM

Composers are forced into making scores that sound familiar to the public so when the movie starts they feel right at home without knowing why. Hi Alex!
Good point, but think of Bernard Hermann: he introduced modern music in big hollywood productions, and this way he created \"new\" familar music for later productions. Is to say: It\'s possible! Well of course, these are often films where we don\'t want the audience to de TOO comfortable images/icons/wink.gif . I\'d love to hear more experimental music in film scores, just something new. It\'s not to offend anybody, but I\'m getting tired of the heroic action brass with military snare rolls. There are so much other things to do... and there are a lot of productions showing that it works (Pola X / Carax, using noise ; Solaris using some kind of spectral music ; The shining using clusters)
Markus.
PS: Well isn\'t this getting a bit off topic???

falcon1

07-23-2003, 03:20 AM

Alex, knowledge is power! However, it\'s true that audience is also power but is the music tested on audience before it\'s put into the movie? I haven\'t heard that. After the audience test, are the audience asked about the music? I don\'t think so.

If that\'s all true which I stated above, why isn\'t the music tested on audience?

Btw. I\'m not talking about playing around! It\'s difference between playing around or adding things in a professional manner!

You say that composers are forced to do this - Well, we aren\'t slaves you know. Why doesn\'t composers object to this behaviour? This monotone music will destroy people\'s senses and taste for quality music, that\'s music with depth and lot of thoughts going into the creation and development of that music.

Anyway, I\'m lucky that this is slightly different here in Iceland - But the pay check is much smaller. images/icons/frown.gif
However, I choice freedom over money anytime!

Alexcremers

07-23-2003, 04:03 AM

Falcon, let me put it even more clearly.

Composer satisfies Producer. Producer is Power. Producer satifies Audience. Audience is Power.

Solaris illustrates this as no other. Not only the music but everything was unusual about this film. How well did Solaris do? How long before we\'ll see another SF movie like it?
Same with Blade Runner.

It is possible ( are you really sure?)that previews neglect to ask audiences about the music. But why do they sometimes replace the entire score if a film flops at the box office?
In the end it\'s all about who is controlling who. Do you really think you can compose freely when millions and millions are at stake?

------------
Alex Cremers

Jazzhole

07-23-2003, 04:21 AM

Sorry to say this falcon1, but you sound a tad naive about showbiz. Artistic freedom is not a luxury many composers get. Lots of other people has put lots of time and money into the project. They WILL judge your cues from their perspective in music. In a perfect composer world of only musicians going to the movies it could work though. images/icons/wink.gif

Cheers

falcon1

07-23-2003, 04:35 AM

First Jazzhole, no offence taken. images/icons/wink.gif I come from another background than most of you and I look at the american showbiz from the outside.
Anyway, here in Iceland there\'s seems to be a lot more freedom than in America and Sweden? Of course the producers come with idea of what kind of music they want, and yes they may want to change something. But they aren\'t so busy saying something like: \"Yes, this is good but this way to complex harmony. Let\'s just use basic harmony\".
If you want to hear different film music, see some Icelandic films. images/icons/wink.gif

Btw. like I said, Icelandic film producers don\'t pay millions for music. So maybe that\'s the reason for the more artistic freedom here, or maybe it\'s the culture? Don\'t know.

Alex, no I\'m not 100% sure about the previews in America but here in Iceland there\'s no question asked specially about the music.

Anyway, maybe I\'m just plain wrong and stupid. images/icons/grin.gif

Markus S

07-23-2003, 04:35 AM

Alex Cremers:

Composer satisfies Producer. Producer is Power. Producer satifies Audience. Audience is Power.
Okay, let me guess... you are looking for a job and hope a producer will read this? images/icons/grin.gif
No, seriously, I don\'t think it\'s that simple. Who\'s the audience? What exactly do they like? Why do they like it? Do they like music, because of their own choise, or because they got used to it? What about the role of radio, publicity?
I think film music is a wonderful way to diffuse classical music to an audience, which would never go to a concert. And I think it\'s not so much the kind of music, but more if it works well with the film. Atonal music is accepted if there\'s murder, religious music if it\'s in a church. Why orchestral music anyway? Why not a band, maybe the audience preferes? I say the \"taste of the masses\" can be educated. Give them the possibility to access musical culture by film, it\'s a good way and it works. Don\'t think *only* of money, it\'s quality of life as well.
Markus.

spectrum

07-23-2003, 04:36 AM

Actually, sometimes they do test different scores with preview audiences on the same film. There are some famous examples of this. (Elfman\'s \"To Die For\" score increased the rating of the movie by a huge percentage)

Usually though, most average people tend to respond to really broad stroke differences in a soundtrack....not subtle things at all. The sad truth is that most people (Americans at least) never notice the music unless its a popular song, or something with a very dramatic theme like J. Williams or Danny Elfman\'s big melodies. Most of the time they only relate to music on a subconscious level. Of course its really important. But sometimes test audiences like temp music better than the real score, I\'m afraid to say!

Even most academy members vote the same way....like when Zimmer\'s \"Preacher\'s Wife\" score got nominated for an Oscar, but he only wrote a few minutes of quick underscore to it....the rest of the movie music was Whitney Houston Gospel songs...but that\'s of course what the audience remembered about the movie...so Hans ended up getting the credit with the audience for what the song producers and Mervyn Warren did with Whitney.

Film Scoring is a very funny business indeed!

spectrum

Maarten Spruijt

07-23-2003, 04:48 AM

Originally posted by falcon1:
Maarten, of course we all need imagination - ... Yeah, I knew you knew. And I agree about that knowledge is power. Just wanted to mention it. You often see classically educated composers looking down on selftaught composers, which is something I really really hate. Or on composers coming from another background. That\'s why I respect composers like Danny Elfman a lot. images/icons/wink.gif

Best,

Maarten

And yes, this thread is getting off-topic. It was about the VSL Pro demos, in case we forgot. images/icons/wink.gif

falcon1

07-23-2003, 05:00 AM

Markus, you got a good point there.

Does the music work well with the film? That\'s the question producers and alike should be asking, not \"can you do this simple harmony\".
Of course simple harmony has it\'s place in films but so do complex harmony. The problem with today\'s film music is that complex harmony just isn\'t there anymore (with few exceptions).

I mean what\'s more appropriated for example battle scene than a battle between very distant chords which just backs up the scene? Maybe the audience don\'t notice the harmony battle, but most of them will (hopefully) feel that something was different than from other films.

In all of my music, I\'m telling a story (movie or not). In the story there are events which happens over time. Isn\'t it boring to listen to story which is something like: \"There was a man he went walking, stopped to get a drink, then he started to walk again, then stopped again etc.\"? In that story there are three events:

1. He went somewhere
2. He walked
3. He stopped to eat

That\'s the story which I hear in many film scores today, I\'m sorry to say.

Also, Markus, I agree with you that people can be re-educated to appreciate good music.

falcon1

07-23-2003, 05:07 AM

Maarten, I knew you knew that I knew. Wow, that was a strange sentence. images/icons/grin.gif

That\'s true Maarten that classically educated composers sometimes look down on self-taught composers. I hope I didn\'t sound like that. If I did, sorry!

The original point I was making that those who know theory etc. can work much faster and produce more quality in shorter time table than those who don\'t have that background.

And yes, sorry that I hijacked the thread. images/icons/grin.gif

Jazzhole

07-23-2003, 05:15 AM

Like my theory teacher said in my teens \"Learn the theory then forget it and make music\" images/icons/grin.gif
I know what your saying though falcon1, and I agree with you about it making composers into \"prostitutes\".

Marteen your still bookmarked and I love the pro demos images/icons/smile.gif

Cheers

falcon1

07-23-2003, 05:22 AM

Jazzhole, you had a great theory teacher. But it\'s not so much about forgetting the theory, rather that not let it prison you into one way of thinking. That is, it\'s ok to bend or break the rules we learn in theory but then you know what you\'re doing.

It\'s like the architects, they know all the rules but break them all the time. However, they don\'t break the rules which are necessary so the building don\'t collapse.

Good that we understand each other. images/icons/wink.gif

Thomas_J

07-23-2003, 05:47 AM

Geez this got out of hand.

Falcon1, you totally misunderstood me with regards to the \"time schedule\" thing. I have a classical music education in orchestral composition and I have no problem writing typical arrangements on paper without the piano, using only conventional counterpoint theory. That\'s not to say it\'s going to sound good. In fact it rarely does. Music is not math. This is why I love Danny Elfman\'s stuff. His music is so uncalculated, it\'s great! He leaves in wrong notes, shifted harmony lines and weird offbeat stuff images/icons/smile.gif I love it. This is pure imagination, not possible to trade for all the cash in the world. Either you\'re born with it, or you\'re not. Falcon1, I think it\'s rather pretentious of you to suggest that you could write a better film score than any of the professional A-list composers working in Hollywood today. People keep telling themselves (probably to cover up their own lack of abilities and far-fetched goals) that the only reason these composer are working in hollywood is because they happened to know the guy who drove the ice cream truck who knew the postman who delivered mail to the house where Spielberg lives.. blahblahblah.

Perhaps you could score a movie that way if you have 10 orchestrators in your back pocket and a guy that fetches you coffee whenever you need it. I was merely giving kudos to Sharmy for his good stuff.

To me Robert Kral\'s comment makes the most sense, as I\'ve experienced this myself. I always try to get by with interesting harmonies, though, as it is the harmonies that makes the music my own, with my personal touch.

Thomas

Maarten Spruijt

07-23-2003, 05:58 AM

Would be interesting if Bach could join this discussion. Talking about music maths and so on. images/icons/smile.gif

Bach, old buddy, you there?

Maarten

Maarten Spruijt

07-23-2003, 06:10 AM

Btw Falcon, no offense taken of course!
I myself am some kind of interesting mix between educated and selftaught.
I\'ve had an extensive education in FILM scoring particularly. And THAT is exactly what makes me work fast; to know WHAT to write WHERE. images/icons/smile.gif

The musical HOW part is mostly selftaught.

All the best,

Maarten

falcon1

07-23-2003, 06:14 AM

Well, Thomas, I wasn\'t pointing fingers at you. I like many of your pieces.
Hmmm... strange, I find it to be well possible to achieve good music by using all the theory methods we learn, plus adding some personal experience into the writting.

In fact I think that your statement \"music is not math\", just plain wrong. I could write a lot on that subject but then we go even more off-topic.

Shifted harmonies are nothing new, you can find it in Brahms, Beethoven, etc. music. Of course there\'s imagination in such type of thing, but it has nothing to do with if you\'re born with it or not. You can learn all these things, but being great at it is possible born related thing.

Maybe I\'m pretentious, but I don\'t think so. In fact some of the scores by some of those called A-list composers are just plain bad. However, it just my oppinion.
Btw. I don\'t care how they got those jobs, I\'m just talking musicvise.

Hmmm... no need for those 10 orchestrators and I don\'t drink coffee. images/icons/grin.gif

Btw. I would never let anyone else orchestrate my works!

Sorry for being so off-topic, but I needed to talk. Too long vacation from those forums, you know. images/icons/grin.gif

Btw. Sharmy, well done!

Markus S

07-23-2003, 06:28 AM

I think music has a lot to do with maths. Especially proportions. Ask the greecs! Our octava is divided in a mathematic way to get the temperated scale. Our whole music scale system is built on mathematics. In musical form, very often the proportions are \"numeric\". See even Bartok, now nobody here would say Bartok doesn\'t write fantastic music. Of course that\'s not all, psycho acoustic is very important, too. I personnally think most people speak of psycho-acoustic when they talk \"feeling in the music\" or \"sounds good or not\". I love those off topic discussions...

falcon1

07-23-2003, 06:31 AM

Maarten,

I really think that we all are mix of educated and self-taught, and to get a good cake the mix must be blended well. Too much \"salt\" and you\'re cake starts to suffer etc. images/icons/wink.gif

Anyway, you can\'t learn everything in formal education but formal education also assist you to find the right answers on your own. It gives you tools to analyse for example other composers works and figure out what the composer did which was so great.

Also, I must say that I respect those who are mostly self-taught and nevertheless creating great music.

Btw. Maarten, I think that most of your pieces are very good. You have a good sense of structure and balance.

peter269

07-23-2003, 06:48 AM

Originally posted by Maarten Spruijt:
Would be interesting if Bach could join this discussion. Talking about music maths and so on. images/icons/smile.gif

Bach, old buddy, you there?

Maarten Yahhhh (stretching out), I\'m here. You want to know about musical maths. Well, let\'s see, I know my counterpoint so well that I can compose fugues on the spot wihtout pen and ink, and can go home and write them down later on.

I wrote more music without electricity then some people do with it. And no matter how you cut the struedel, it\'s cheaper to replace a quill then a hard drive.

Rules of music? I break them all the time. Rules of music are for academicians who wouldn\'t know a quill from a cow. And it\'s not that dumb statement I always hear, \"first you learn the rules then you break them.\" Nonsense. Every style of music has its own harmonic motion. These become its rules, otherwise people would call country jazz, and jazz, country. At the same time, there is a common practice which binds all western music together. That is where you start, and then your ear takes you to the next step. School Rules are created by musical historians who failed as accountants and turned to music to continue their bean counting. This way they satisfy their puny little egos because they can yell RIGHT or WRONG and sound very scholarly and God-like while doing so!

I ask a question and I go back to bed.

How is it that Haydn, Mozart and Beethoven all studied out of the Fux book, but neither sounded like the other in their music?

Johanne

Markus S

07-23-2003, 06:59 AM

How is it that Haydn, Mozart and Beethoven all studied out of the Fux book, but neither sounded like the other in their music?

Oh my! I hope if I respond to this you won\'t see me as a failed musician who refuges in academic rules... *gulp*
Steve Reich (sorry for knowing that images/icons/frown.gif )says an interesting thing about this matter:
He thinks you can take the structure of the music, but not the sound. He is inspired by african music, but he don\'t want to *sound* like it. That\'s why he uses the well tempered scale and western instruments. He just lerns from the strucure. And to explain his point of vieuw he says that Bach ( or Fux), Webern, Bartok all write based on counterpoint strucutre (for exemple canons), but they sound very differently. Structure is the same, but sounds differently.
Markus.

Alexcremers

07-23-2003, 07:48 AM

Hey, this thread keeps on changing topics. Where is that interesting \"Power\" subject gone to?
Anyway about people who are self-taught, Paul McCartney doesn\'t read or write music and he\'s really into the orchestral thing for some time now. He works with an orchestrator who translates his ideas into legit notes on paper. I\'ll bet it\'s still difficult to criticize and tell Paul whether his ideas are any good or not, even if you have all the knowledge and education in the world, with him being that Beatle and all. That brings me back to POWER without KNOWLEDGE. Sorry, I didn\'t mean to. images/icons/wink.gif

------------
Alex Cremers

csduke

07-23-2003, 09:02 AM

Originally posted by peter269:

I know my counterpoint so well that I can compose fugues on the spot without pen and ink, ..
That\'s impressive. One thing is for certain, you cannot faux fux.

Originally posted by peter269:

I wrote more music without electricity then some people do with it.
That\'s the best line i\'ve heard since, well, Bruce\'s last post. images/icons/wink.gif

07-23-2003, 09:14 AM

I just got too angry on another thread so I came here to cool off.

I\'ve always found the concept that harmonies can be simple or complex rather strange. It\'s just sound; the complexites are projections.

Paul McCartney is an interesting case. I remember him saying in an interview that him and John Lennon had no idea that anyone was allowed to \'own\' a song (from a guy who now \'owns\' around 25,000 songs and makes a hundred million a year from them), he said they used to just pluck them out of the air. You can hear his genius and naivety in his early works and his music seems to tail off with the accumulation of theory or \'knowledge\'. I could listen to the Beatles all day, but I haven\'t heard a decent tune from him in thirty years - and it keeps getting worse.

I never could integrate theory into the bit of my bonce that is mildly musical. I went to college and the theory set me back until a couple of years after I left. I suspect (outside of real \'self-teaching\') that the best way to study is with someone you respect; a \'master\' if you will. If someone came to me now for guitar lessons I\'d tell them to save all the money they expect to pay over the next five years, go find the musician they absolutely go crazy for, and give him or her the cash for one single lesson that\'ll last.

Only a tiny percentage of music students become musicians. There has to be a reason for that. Only a tiny percentage of musicians have studied music formally. There has to be a reason for that.

Rules, schmools. If it feels good, do it. if it sounds good, enjoy it. I knew a guy who could improvise five-part fugues. How can you even learn to do that? I couldn\'t do that if I lived for a million years. (He got expelled for breaking his arm - brutal.)

Music \'theory\' isn\'t theory in the true sense that we expect from the theory of other things, it\'s just a formalized way of looking.

I had trouble with my first-year ear-training exams, then sailed through second-year exams the next day, and I killed the third-year exams the day after. I had some crappy rock and jazz experience and the more \'complex\' harmonies became to muso types, the easier they became for me. I \'knew\' the sounds. They were already a part of my toolbox before I \'studied\' theory; the \'complexity\' was really just an artifact of their culture versus mine.

I can\'t hear \'muddy chords\' as muddy, or consecutives as bad because that\'s all I did on guitar - sounded good to me. When I had to harmonize lines at the piano, it was torture; I\'d play at a minute a beat (literally) trying to figure out all the theory. When I eventually convinced the powers to let me do it on guitar, I felt like Django \"What? Ya want a transposition? No poblem, what key?\" It went from impossible to insanely easy.

I think it can all be very fragile and 90% of music colleges will destroy you if you haven\'t already built strong defences before you arrive.

When people ask if they should study \'theory\' I never know how to respond, because they asked the question and therefore have no idea what theory means. They always expect too much of it, like it will give them a lifeline when times are hard. Maybe it does for some, but \'understanding\' music is what counts. Mozart and Metheny and a young McCartney understood music, whatever they said about their understanding it is there for us to hear.

07-23-2003, 09:19 AM

Originally posted by peter269:

I wrote more music without electricity then some people do with it. And no matter how you cut the struedel, it\'s cheaper to replace a quill then a hard drive.
Those quills were pretty expensive back then. I\'d guess a higher percentage of the population can replace their hard drives now than could replace quills then.
images/icons/wink.gif

Jazzhole

07-23-2003, 09:40 AM

Back to VSL! For all you swedes/scandinavians out there, the newest issue of Musikermagasinet just did a great review of VSL with lots of info and pictures from their recording facility, which looked amazing btw. Eventhough the writer didnt know the concept of having more then one computer in his giga setup =)

Cheers

Thomas_J

07-24-2003, 05:16 AM

Peter, a lot of the teachers I had could do that but in all honesty it didn\'t really make their music all that interesting. They kept forcing me to learn this, which I didn\'t have much interest in. I did however learn the basics well enough to be independent of my computers and my piano, but not enough to compose good music.

Z6, yeah a lot of people ask me what education I have all the time. When they get their answer they want to build a studio and go to a music conservatory. I just tell them \"okey, but it\'s gonna mean ZERO girlfriends for the next 8 years!\" and their enthusiasm disappears in a split second. Those who devote their entire life to their art (provided that they have talent) will eventually reach their goals images/icons/smile.gif
There are so many people who think you can just write orchestral music like you write any other style. They\'re sitting there with their softsynths and beatboxes, knocking out a few melodies with one finger on the keyboard. Then they ask \"so how do I make this melody into an orchestral song? Should I start with the tuba or fiddle or what? TEACH ME!!\"

*sigh*

Okey totally off topic but I just had to say it images/icons/smile.gif

Thomas

Jazzhole

07-24-2003, 05:27 AM

Hehe was the opposite for me, ZERO girlfriends after I found my new darling gigastudio. images/icons/tongue.gif

Cheers

JonP

07-24-2003, 10:45 AM

Originally posted by Thomas_J:
I just tell them \"okey, but it\'s gonna mean ZERO girlfriends for the next 8 years!\" and their enthusiasm disappears in a split second.Man o man, that is so not my experience of a good music education images/icons/smile.gif

I was performing like a little lab rat from age 7 years on at The Purcell school and later at the Royal College of Music and the Prague Conservatory, and never did I have to keep my head down to the expense of having a girlfriend!.

Theory is just one of those things that, if you\'re not taught it properly, can be daunting and uninteresting. The key is to learn WHY progressions move the way they do, WHY composers use this or that device to define their individual voice and HOW it goes to make up a final \"la ligne\" piece etc etc. Boring academic manuals so often delve into the most intricate nano-details but without ever really getting to the crux of the matter. They are weighty and draining to read and make some people feel like they\'re incapable of learning such high ideas, or that the whole subject is boring.

But it so isn\'t the case if you learn with the right teacher. They will explain about tonal harmony\'s need for resolution and about how many great composers used things like pedal points etc to suspend such resolution and increase the length of movements as result - and so on and so on.

If you are truly daunted by the subject, employ a spirited knowledgeable teacher who knows how to make the subject fun (but not in a detrimental or \"dumbing-down\" way). It\'ll open up a whole new world for you. And once you\'re armed with such knowledge you can use it to whatever effect you wish. Woohoo!.

tomhartman

07-24-2003, 04:20 PM

Originally posted by Maarten Spruijt:
Thanks all! I appreciate it.
Making \'Traincatcher\' was a lot of fun.

Garius, my .com is down at the moment, hope to put it back up again soon. However, I have a mirror site right here (\"http://www2.hku.nl/~maarte2/index.html\").

Thanks for your interest!

Best,

Maarten Martin,

Great stuff, \"Traincatcher.\"

I want to ask you about the string gliss near the end...since I don\'t have VSL....could you explain how that kind of thing is done? In past libraries of course, you have a menu of \"VLN GLISSES\" or the like, and while they may sound great (Roland has some super ones) it\'s really hard to go from your normal string line, into the gliss, and then back to the normal string line, which is of course another sample on another midi track, for instance. I noted in this piece the gliss was so natural, it sounded like the main patch you used for the violins just suddenly started playing again after the gliss. Really cool

Thanks for any info.

Maarten Spruijt

07-24-2003, 05:22 PM

Hey Tomhartman,

Thanks.

Yeah you are right the violin glissandi are a little more special than just fixed sampled glisses. I used the Performance Glissando. This works in the exact way as the Legatos, so with real \'interval recordings\' being triggered. With the Performance Glissandi, however, they are (doh) performed with long, slow glissandi, like you\'re hearing in the demo, instead of fast note changes. This means you can play the source and destination notes for the glissandi manually and realtime. Really cool. Not just for strings. Just think of bones (slides) and clarinet (Gershwin). images/icons/smile.gif

Maarten

falcon1

07-24-2003, 05:37 PM

Hi Maarten, those short staccato notes in strings and trumpets(?), are they performed real time with the performance tool?

falcon1

07-24-2003, 05:39 PM

Damn double post. images/icons/frown.gif

Maarten Spruijt

07-24-2003, 06:33 PM

Those short staccato notes are not performance tool items, but so-called Fast Repetitions. They are normal, fixed phrases, in a small set of different tempi. They work great for fast 16th or 8th/16th triplet stuff. They have a closing staccato note programmed as release trigger, so you can realistically end the repetition at any point before the natural ending.

So let\'s say we have an uptempo 12/8 metrum and we\'re playing with a Fast Repetition sample with a tempo 3x faster than the tempo the 12/8 and we\'ll input:

X = note on O = note off - = hold

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3
X----O X-----------------O

X is on 1st and 7th. O is on 4th and 1st beats.

... we will get to hear:

1 2 3 TadadaDam TadadadadadaDam

Get it? images/icons/smile.gif

Maarten