I\'m sure this has been discussed many times before but I hear so much about doing great \'mock-ups\'
Like many of you I simply cannot afford to hire a real orchestra.
I know strings are the great challenge. Over perhaps 12 years I have tried a number of approaches and none really were successful . Many processors and samples etc.
By chance I had one of the great conductors in my house and we discussed this.
Basically it comes down to strings ( sections)
Well , I am ready to try yet once again. Likely a combination of GPO and GOS.
I will add/replace certain groups as necessary along the way.
These could be anything from anywhere ie Sam Horns. Any thoughts /advice along the way will be interesting and helpful I\'m sure.
As part of this huge undertaking I am in the midst of having part of my home made into a professional studio. Twenty years ago I owned a pro commercial recording studio and am fortunate to have the main engineer back on the team for this project . Since money is tight he will work for nothing one or 2 days per week for a year. The first thing he had me do was buy an analogue mastering machine , 1/2 inch 2 track . There are compelling reasons for this.
The other thing I have done is make do with a used car and instead buy a real grand piano. Why??? I have tried everything over the years as far as piano samples and yes they are improving , but NOWHERE near the sound of this Disclavier Grand . Piano , strings and orchestra... lovely...
If any of you out there have real interest in what unfolds here as far as the sonic excellence we hope to achieve , then I will post more.
The point of this really is an attempt to create something tremendous musically and sonically mainly with samples and an outstanding room..
Good luck on your endeavor, sounds nice. Just remember, LESS is MORE. And digital is not the problem, it\'s bad analog front ends on digital converters that make digital masters sound bad! (and too much tweaking during the mastering stage in a digital editing station. It creates math errors that ruin the sound quality).
Strings are really important, but its the BRASS that will really ruin the illusion in an orchestral mock-up. Buy the best you can afford. SAM are really great, but I\'ve not heard the new Sonic Implants collection yet. Might be what you need!
Oh my word this is long but it\'s gooooood [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
Virtually all the records in the \"LP\" days were equalized, so much that there had to be a dedicated organization called RIAA to organize the different methods of mastering that would be used for cutting records. LP\'s have a major limit of dynamic range, not to mention many other horrible qualities like wow and flutter, limited frequency response and turntable rumble just to name a few. I know this thread is not about LP\'s or turntables. I just want to voice my opinion about these so called awesome analoge devices that some folks are infatuated with, and that\'s really OK too. Please don\'t blow your money on some of this old gear, it won\'t make near the improvement that YOU can make if you just \"trust your ears\"........ well, as long as you have great monitor speakers, and that\'s a whole different can of worms. In fact, if you don\'t have really good monitors, just don\'t EQ any of the GPO sounds, they are very natural and sound pretty awesome right out of the box!
Record cutting (mastering) engineers were interested in doing whatever they could to get the \"record\" master to sound just like the original studio master tapes. It was a never ending battle, compression was used, usually way too much... and too much bass makes the grooves too wide and cuts down playing time on that side of the record, balh blah, blah.
Some of the oldie but goodies LP\'s have been re-released on CD and the marketing strategies that were common were,,, \"DIGITALLY REMASTERED\" yea, they were...... copied from the original tapes, before the EQ\'ing took place for the record master. When you consider that the LP master was almost always over EQ\'d, it\'s no wonder that the LP sounds more crisp and has fatter lows during an A/B comparison. Just like Nexus said LESS IS MORE.
There is an ongoing debate among engineers as to what tube mic sounds the best, and what \"vintage mic preamp\" provides that nice warm lush sound that everyone so desperately desires.
Run your mix through a piece of analog gear and it will magically create that vintage \"warm\" sound that you crave,,,,,,, yea sure.
So where am I going with all this, and how does it pertain to what we do here with sampled sounds?
Equalization is a tool that most of us have at our disposal and way too often it is over used, or set way out of line for natural sound. If your mix is decent, or just so so, mixing it onto one of these old analoge recorders will faithfully reproduce your so so mix, and add some slight distortion, and oh, a free side order of tape hiss. Personally, I could not wait for analoge recording to be history, and for me and many others, it is. I say good riddens! I LOVE DIGITAL SOUND, and embrace it\'s many advantages compared to analoge.
This post was not for the purpose of making fun of older gear, some of it is truly awesome equipment (in the right hands). If it\'s what you have, and it works great, GREAT! Don\'t think for second that buying and using some of that stuff will fix your sound problems. If your current project is too dry or wet, or too bassy or has too much high end, those bad qualities takes your piece of music further away from what it could have been.
If it sounds pretty nice without adding anything except some (really good reverb), don\'t change the EQ, and whatever you do, don\'t compress the whole final stereo mix, uhhhhhh! [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
I\'m done ranting, get in there and fix that mix,,,,, work on one sound at a time, and then when you have two sounds that you think are good, mix just those two, then when that blend and sound is good, go on to the next instrument. Just some ideas to try before you go out and buy some really expensive \"vintage\" gear and end up disappointed. I\'m tired and goin\' to bed..... aren\'t you all glad... [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
No hard feelings to those that adore analoge stuff, I really do appreciate the fact that you have just as much of a right to love it, as I have to say goodbye to it.
good bye [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
You raise many interesting points. I have an idea why so many of us are constantly searching for that \'holy grail\' processing device. We simply haven\'t mastered that very elusive art - and I stress \'art\' - of mixing. It takes years and years to develop the ears to hear what should be heard, and many more years to learn what to do in response to mix problems. With modern DAW\'s, most of us have far more power at our fingertips than we know what to do with, it\'s both a blessing and a curse. Heck, I\'ve had Waves\' C4 for a few years now, and I still don\'t know how to properly use it. In my hands, it\'s best off gathering dust, and I suspect I\'m not alone. :-)
You\'re so right about letting the GPO instruments be themselves, without major processing. I had an epiphany recently when I loaded up Duncan Brinsmead\'s midi file of Mozart\'s Clarinet concerto in Digital Performer. Without any EQ or exotic processing, once I got the volume levels for the instruments properly balanced, I had a glorious sound. It sounded remarkably real. I couldn\'t believe little old GPO in my computer was producing this wondrous result streaming directly from Midi. Why? Here comes the epiphany. The piece was well written and orchestrated, that\'s why it sounded so good.
Write and orchestrate properly, pay attention to the detail of each instrument\'s performance, pay attention to a few major but simple rules of mixing (e.g. basic panning, reasonable relative volumes, reasonable tuning of reverb sends....) and the result will stand out in a positive way with GPO.
No manner of widgets or processors, or mixing skills, will ever take the place of the basic writing and orchestration itself. That\'s where I am now putting my attention.