The cello pizza attack is on the beat, but because of the nature of the violin attacks, which is a slow attack, you get this impression. I'm not going to play the cello pizz after the beat It's extremely common in orchestra, strings sounding behind, especial vs a more percussive instrument.
I understand all the issues with regard to timing if a set of specific samples were made where the musicians did not attack the string with gusto, or in more cases than not, poor editing of the sample pool.
I was just suggesting that the pizz part be nudged later to be in musical sync (tightness) to where they are written in this piece, or commonly heard in a recording of great musicians
That could worth a try, but it may bring new problems with the faster notes that are more clearly on the beat, they may seem off the beat now, and if you start moving certain bass pizz notes and not others, its pulsation becomes unnatural. But it's worth a try, maybe a tad won't hurt.
only from a musical standpoint, I can't believe neither one of you guys did
anything about the bass pizza's being so far ahead of the beat throughout.
Just a suggestion.
I hear you, definetely. Just for the records I believe the version in the original post is currently not my version (as of date today). And for my version I only took Guy's stereo mix and mangled it a bit, so the option of moving bass notes was limited. I suggested having the bass breath a bit more and moved a few bass notes here and there at the transitions though in order to un-rush it.
Initially I responded to this at another place in order to participate in a discussion about musical timing and shaping. I am repeating here what I wrote since it might be an entry for you or anybody else to further discuss these musical questions:
Since this rendition is musically beautiful it might be a starting point to discuss some musical issues rather than the repeating "does it sound real" thing. I try to start:
As a general thought there are different schools of micro-grooving such music. There are those that use an always slightly changing pulse (tempo), depending on the phase of the phrase. Then there are those that introduce noticeable rubato (and maybe accellerando at some places). And then there are those that try to keep the tempo constant but allow a breath here and there (especially shortly before the ONE).
I think I sympathise with the third group but I use both other methods too if it fits.
What is important in this case of couse is to play it like it would have been composed right now, not as if it were known for centuries. I always try to get more the perspective of a discoverer, less of a museum guide.
In order to all that I think the beginnings could be even more like feeling for a way (although this is already there). And I avoid all too stereotypic ritardandos as I feel much more comforteable with exploring the end notes individually and figure out what each one means.
The second musical aspect that can be studied on this piece of music is "spinning the thread". The melody is like a string that goes and goes and goes, so we have to find a way to make it develop on and on without breaking it. This is why I think it should not become too weak before the endings.
To be more concrete, my dynamical musical model is not so much symmetrical brackets (crescendo - decrescendo, crescendo - decrescendo). Instead of this the weight (that means the place where the most important notes are) is often shifted to the right, towards the end. As a general hint I look for the last subdominant or the last dominant and build up until there. But that is really only a rough guide.
The other means to "spin the thread" is actually a psycho-acoustic illusion that you use very fortunately. You build up to a certain point or note but when it comes you don't really hit on it, instead you play along with lower volume and build up from there again.
BTW in this sort of music we anyways don't want to hit on anything that is obvious except of maybe ONE time in any piece which then would then be THE climax. Be sparse, and it will be very much more effective. Every piece should have THAT ONE place ... but only one, and I sometimes wonder whether composers know themselves where that is. This has to do with architecture and form.
I tried a little shaping according to those points ... ignore the sound and the artefacts, that is not what I am after here: