• Register
  • Help
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 29

Topic: ProjectSAM Symphobia: Great sound, but setting a dangerous trend?

Share/Bookmark
  1. #1

    ProjectSAM Symphobia: Great sound, but setting a dangerous trend?

    I've been checking out Symphobia (extensive demo listening, reading up on instrument and program lists, video tutorials from Maarten and others, etc.) and finding myself torn. There's no question about how good the library sounds, but, for me anyway, there are questions about how good the library might be for the scoring industry.

    For those who don't know, this is a library that combines ensemble recordings of the orchestra to recreate in vivid realism the acoustic space and natural positioning of a true live recording. Instead of recording individual sections, the library has recorded various sectional groupings together to capture all the natural sonic idiosyncracies found therein. In their words, "the real thing just sounds better." (i.e. when two sections play together, it is a different sound than layering individually recorded sections on top of each other). There can be no denial that the demos reveal a natural "live" sound unparalleled in the sample world for orchestral libraries.

    However, in my opinion, there are several negative factors that this library introduces to the world of film scoring anew:

    1. The library is the first "serious" orchestral volume to begin controlling orchestration for the composer. It limits orchestral choice based on the mapping of the various patches. And while the instrument list is fairly extensive for what kind of library this is (though nothing compared to other more thorough libraries dedicated to individual instruments and sections) using this library will require you to defer to the orchestrational doubling choices laid out for you. Now I realize that the whole point of this library is to hasten to the workflow while maintaining high sound quality, but, as a self respecting composer, I take fundamental issue with this. Orchestrational choice is paramount to individual style, and frankly, I find that this library defaults to the unfortunately limited orchestrational "style" of the Zimmer camp et al. Where everything is doubled to egregious levels and the orchestrational sophistication is diminished greatly. Doubled (or tripled) triads across sections does not good orchestration make, an using this library, it seems you will be relagated to just that with very minor exception. This is perhaps the biggest case of a library that requires that you write for IT and not YOU. If you want total control over your orchestration this is not the library for you.

    2. Forced style. Related to the above, this library clearly has strengths, but because of the "sound" it dictates, it will bring about more of the same thing from most who use it. It's an unfortunate truth that commercial scoring is squeezed stylistically as it is, based on a few (sometimes very limited composers') offerings. This library seems to perpetuate that common style by forcing it's "sound" on those who use it. If you want subtlty in texture (vlns playing one thing, high winds another) you might not be able to achieve it here. The more this library finds its way into composers' arsenals, the more carbon-copy music will be produced as a result, at least with regard to orchestration. It seems to me that this is a library imposes a very specific sound on those who use it. Of course that's exactly what it was designed to do, but the result is that more and more composers who might have otherwise been more creative with their writing will defer to the ease and speed of loading up a full ensemble patch and playing block chords--a sound that Hollywood has been shoving down our throats for too long now as it is. With Symphobia, it seems that that sound is now even more easy to achieve than ever, and I fear the result will be a continuation of the "rock keyboard player" orchestral sound that has been taking over film and commercial scoring for years now.

    3. Leveling the playing field. The scary thing is how good this library sounds out of the box with almost no effort on the part of the composer. This is the kind of library where you can load up a couple patches and play a few chords (or even a single note) and get a full symphonic ensemble sound. As a result, anyone who can pony up the cash can start generating finished sounding cues. A lot of the 'inside" writers tricks are all recorded for you here, so anyone who has no clue how to actually go about writing some of these effects can end up with pretty realistic sounding demos as a result. Which may seem like a great thing to an up and comer, but to the composers who actually can write it for the scoring stage might find themselves fighting for gigs against very limited writers with great sounding demos. I guess this delves into the whole ethical question of using these kinds of libraries. There are a few libraries like this that have begun to do some of the writing for you. As a film and TV composer, I realize that this isn't always art music we're making here (usually not!) but as composer, I've always felt that the craft you develop is essential to your artistic output. That no artist should ever be limited by his tools, and a library that begins to dictate the output, the creative choices for you, is a limiting factor. If that library allows those who have not necessarily developed the craft to "pass muster" as it were, to me anyway, it seems very misrepresentative of that composer's ability and creative vision, and might result in many composers all cranking out the same thing, even if they'd need ten orchestrators to write it for the live session. Once upon a time, being able to compose for film required a comprehensive musical understanding. A highly specialized job that only the best writers could break into. Thanks to some technology, not anymore. With the right "user friendly" libraries anyone can make something that sounds at least professional. And because "anyone" is now scoring blockbuster films (and as a result, setting the trends), the quality of the music has diminished. Unfortunately, I fear this library may fall into that category.

    4. Translation to live. Tying in to that is the way this library doesn't translate to a live score. Loading up a 4 section patch and playing chords does not translate to a conductor's score. For those who have no idea who's playing what, the transcription will be vague and inaccurate. For those who do know, or for orchestrators given a sequencer session using this library, the workload will be increased, picking apart the patches and transcribing from ear. Needless to say, a midi import into Sibelius or Finale would be pretty useless. To say nothing of the fact that this library almost forces you NOT to think orchestrationally when writing. You load a patch, play, and there you have a full orchestra. Sounds good enough so no need to over think it. As opposed to a library where all instruments are individually sampled. There you have to actually think about your choices, and as a result it will be YOUR choice. You actually have to compose it yourself--what a novel idea! I guess this ties in with the same ethical question...

    So I guess my bottom line is that Symphobia seems to be part of the newest trend of libraries that are beginning to make the choices for the composers for the sake of speed and ease, that are possibly limiting the writing, and allowing those who don't really know what they're doing to generate professional sounding music and potentially enter the already overcrowded composer market in Hollywood. at the same time continuing to limit the already shrinking variance of commercial music in terms of style, orchestration, and creative direction in an industry that does enough of that on its own.

    Again, I think this library sounds amazing. The demos are fantastic, but my guess of course is that they are all written to the specific strengths of the library. I'd like to hear a demo of this utilizing the Williams/Spencer orchestration style and see where it stands. Obviously Symphobia was designed for composers to have a quick and easy way to crank out a very specific thing, and to that end it seems on point. For a professional composer, especially a writer well versed in orchestration, I think Symphobia could be an invaluable addition to an existing orchestral pallet. But I fear a possible negative offshoot of this library might be the continuation of a trend where the library does more and more of the writing for you, and more and more composers, or even musical neophytes, are all cranking out the same (very realistic sounding) music. In a line of work inherently limited by by trends, producers, what's on the screen, and an already tiny amount of creative wiggle room stylistically, it seems the one thing we don't need is our own tools telling us what to do at the drawing board.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Budleigh Salterton
    Posts
    1,477

    Re: ProjectSAM Symphobia: Great sound, but setting a dangerous trend?

    Quote Originally Posted by shnurgle View Post
    There's no question about how good the library sounds, but, for me anyway, there are questions about how good the library is for for the scoring industry.
    For scoring and orchestrating the way you do Miles, I'm not sure how useful it would be. For mocking yours, or other writers works, I would imagine it would be very good. (On re-reading that, it doesn't sound right - but you know what I mean )

    Quote Originally Posted by shnurgle View Post
    it is a different sound than layering individually recorded sections on top of each other).There can be no denial that the demos reveal a natural "live" sound unparalleled in the sample world for orchestral libraries.
    The library is about sound and speed of use. Although I have only had it for a few weeks and hardly had time to use it - it's definitely handy for keyboard players as opposed to mouse clicking.

    Quote Originally Posted by shnurgle View Post
    Now I realize that the whole point of this library is to hasten to the workflow while maintaining high sound quality, but, as a self respecting composer, I take fundamental issue with this. Orchestrational choice is paramount to individual style, and frankly, I find that this library defaults to the unfortunately limited orchestrational "style" of the Zimmer camp et al.
    Hehehe - Miles, since when did any style of sample library make any difference to a writers preferred style.
    This library as you already said - is for sound and speed of use - not really for serious orchestrating.

    Quote Originally Posted by shnurgle View Post
    This is perhaps the biggest case of a library that requires that you write for IT and not YOU. If you want total control over your orchestration this is definitely not the library for you.
    Probably correct but most people it seems write to any other sample libraries strengths too.

    Quote Originally Posted by shnurgle View Post
    It's an unfortunate truth that commercial scoring is squeezed stylistically as it is, based on a few (sometimes very limited composers') offerings. This library seems to perpetuate that common style by forcing it's "sound" on those who use it.
    You shouldn't worry about any of that - just get on and do what you think is good. Homogenous film scores have been around since films began with very few originals - I don't think another sample library will make any difference to any of that. All libraries impose their sound on the user - they are all just snapshots in time that never change - ergo, nothing anyone can do about that.




    Quote Originally Posted by shnurgle View Post
    I fear the result will be a continuation of the "dumbed-down" writing that has been taking over film and commercial scoring for years now.
    As long as directors and producers have holes in their collective ***es there will be dumbed down writing and another sample library will not change that. You need to write what you think is original and works at the same time. Even though Symphobia sounds good out of the box - logically it's going to sound better the better the musician you are.



    Quote Originally Posted by shnurgle View Post
    .. and allowing those who don't really know what they're doing to generate professional sounding music and potentially enter the already overcrowded composer market in Hollywood. At the same time continuing to limit the already shrinking variance of commercial music in terms of style, orchestration, and creative direction in an industry that does enough of that on its own.
    You're worrying about too much trivia here Miles. Remember what Herrmann said - Hollywood is full of stupid, vacuous people who have no idea about anything.

    That in fact is too narrow. He could have said most of the world, actually.

    I'm old enough now to realize that making your way forward and making money in this world means you have to forget about what others are doing.

    Sample libraries will continue to be developed and let out into the market (a very narrow market) - and bought by all sorts of musicians at their varying levels of skill development. With Symphobia, you need to be aware of the legato function btw if not already. However, if you don't already have it - you need to weigh it all up in terms of how often you're going to use it and can you make money with it.

  3. #3

    Re: ProjectSAM Symphobia: Great sound, but setting a dangerous trend?

    No composer creates out of nothing, something is "imposed" upon what they do....Symphobia is a tool, and for the hobbyist and great boon....if only the price could be justified to the wife!

  4. #4

    Re: ProjectSAM Symphobia: Great sound, but setting a dangerous trend?

    Call me a fool but so far I don't loose any sleep because of the new libraries - quality-wise.

    However I wonder what happens if producers see a video of guy banging ten minutes into a keyboard coming up with a "good enough" cue. I guess the price for a minute of TV music might fall to two digits per minute, maybe even in the lower range "if that is so easy".
    All your strings belong to me!
    www.strings-on-demand.com

  5. #5

    Re: ProjectSAM Symphobia: Great sound, but setting a dangerous trend?

    I don't think it's anything negative at all. I have full-keyboard patch setups for the various instrument families (strings, brass, woodwinds) for all my samplers so that I can bang out fast orchestrations quickly from my keyboard. The results are not totally "college correct", but hey, it's Hollywood and we must hack!

    Symphobia has just taken it to a higher level. It's just a matter of time before others release similar patch setups. These setups are possible with any sample library. I know that even Scott Smalley uses this approach when pitching certain things.

  6. #6

    Re: ProjectSAM Symphobia: Great sound, but setting a dangerous trend?

    This doesn't worry me at all. Pump Audio, Getty and now iStockphoto offering TONS of music for nothing is REALLY f-ed up. Entire shows can get all the music they need for hundreds of dollars. That's dangerous to me.

  7. #7

    Re: ProjectSAM Symphobia: Great sound, but setting a dangerous trend?

    Miles, check your PM

  8. #8

    Re: ProjectSAM Symphobia: Great sound, but setting a dangerous trend?

    Quote Originally Posted by shnurgle View Post
    I've been... blah, blah, blah
    I'm a computer programmer.
    When I write a program and deliver it to a client, the only thing the client does is make sure the application is functional from the design specification (business rules, etc...).

    If I even mention that it was written in C, C++, C#, VB.Net, Java, Smalltalk, etc..., their first comment is "huh?".

    Clients don't care how it's written, all they care about is if the application makes them productive.
    The only person who cares about how it's written is me.
    I choose the language, development tools, sdks to make my job faster, but it's still up to me to make sure the application is done correctly.
    In a comptitive market, I need those tools.

    Same holds true for writing jingles, soundtracks, etc...
    Do you really think clients care if you use a real orchestra or a sampled library?
    No, they just want a great sounding song/jingle but quickly.
    The have to finish their project as well which includes your song/jingle.

    How do you stay comptitive with other composers, with new music libraries, samples, synth, etc...

    I was reading a post at EastWest's forum and this idiot was complaining about a click he kept hearing on one of the pianos when he was playing it.
    I thought he was about to cry (he posted this as an audio on his MySpace account).
    He kept saying, "do you hear it, there it is, do you hear it".
    I couldn't hear it and if I couldn't hear it, a non-musican would never notice it.

    I'll be looking at ProjectSAM Symphobia now.

  9. #9
    Senior Member playz123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Victoria, Canada
    Posts
    535

    Re: ProjectSAM Symphobia: Great sound, but setting a dangerous trend?

    Re: "I'll be looking at ProjectSAM Symphobia now"
    ---There's an article on this product in the brand new online version of "Virtual Instruments" magazine, now available to subscribers at the VI web site...just in case anyone is interested in reading more about it................playz
    Cubase 7.0.3, Wavelab 7.1, Omnisphere, Trilian, Stylus RMX, Symphobia 1 & 2 , all Spitfire libraries, LASS 2, Requiem Pro, Voxos, Superior Drummer 2, Komplete 8, Cinematic Guitars, most EW libraries, Chris Hein Horns, Guitar & Bass, 2.8 GHz Mac Pro, 18 GB RAM, OS 10.6.8, RME Multiface II + HDSP PCIe

  10. #10

    Re: ProjectSAM Symphobia: Great sound, but setting a dangerous trend?

    Quote Originally Posted by dinerdog View Post
    This doesn't worry me at all. Pump Audio, Getty and now iStockphoto offering TONS of music for nothing is REALLY f-ed up. Entire shows can get all the music they need for hundreds of dollars. That's dangerous to me.
    This is what concerns me as well. Will we soon see entire shows made up of clip art, pre-canned music, and downloadable video clips. Music and art are a lot more enjoyable than digging a ditch or waiting tables. Perhaps the days of the gazillion dollar pop star are coning to an end. You can get your fill of music on sites like Pandora, Youtube etc, all for free. This means that content becomes devalued and we, the artists, will be payed less and less.

    As far as Symphobia being an, orchestral composition in a box, this is just the natural evolution of technology. There are already many "instant composition" softwares like Acid, garageband etc. There will always be a market for custom scoring with real musicians and composers. When a movie can bring in a half a billion dollars you have to believe there's a few bucks available for the Elfman's and Zimmers. It just sems like that market is getting smaller everyday.

    Darren
    www.darrenpasdernick.com
    "Every time you play a wrong note God kills a kitten."

Go Back to forum

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •