Vienna Symphonic Library Forum
Forum Statistics

180,797 users have contributed to 42,141 threads and 254,364 posts.

In the past 24 hours, we have 1 new thread(s), 7 new post(s) and 74 new user(s).

  • General work process? How do you all do it? Struggling with tools.

    I'm seriously ready to quit.  20 years ago I used to make a ton of music on a hardward sequencer with a 24 character LCD screen. And I was great at it.  Now I have all this power of Cubase and Vienna, and I just can't get any creative flow. I can use Cubase in general pop music recording, but orchestral just seems different.  It's making me nuts. 

    Here's some of why -- I have to try to setup my keyboard or the VSL presets because it's got 61 keys and all the Vienna presets are made for 88-key keyswitches.  Then map MIDI CC to expression, cross-fade, etc....  How to do this for all different instruments, then set up 30 track templates in Cubase with all instruments laid out, etc....   Does everyone go through this torture? How do you get anything done?

    All I wanted to do was write some neat orchestral music like I used to do in college, and I'm just running into 42 yr old frustration with analysis paralysis.  What's worse -- I'm actually a computer programmer (senior, significantly respected at work) and I just can't get this stuff to flow like I did with much simpler tools.   I must be missing something simple? I feel like I just need to see the light.

    Does anyone have starting point suggestions?  What's your creative flow?  Do you have a video of how you get started and how you lay down tracks, do you work with a click track when doing orchestral or just work freely, etc...  Stuff like that.

    I have Cubase 7 and Vienna Special Edition 1 (basic orchestra and a few solo).  Just got a Nektar Panorama P6 keyboard with the new Cubase integration.  (I also have an Alesis QS8 weighted 88, but I didn't think it had the right stuff to work with Cubase like the new controllers do, and weighted was hard for me to play faster parts, but maybe I should have gotten the P1 and kept my keys.)


  • I feel your pain. People are going to suggest various technical solutions which will probably make your life even more complicated. You need to simplify - rather than trying to create some massive universal template which will bog you down creatively at every turn, write your music using as few instruments as possible, and stick to basic articulations like sus and stacc. When the music is written, expand the template to include the fancy stuff.

    You can write music for strings using a single patch like 425 App-Strings sustain, and separate the parts out for violins, violas etc. later. Start out with solo instruments (trumpet / trombone / tuba, French Horn, flute / clari / oboe / bassoon) and substitute ensembles later if it helps. Don't be afraid to play chords on a solo instrument, it's quicker than programming three separate parts! Add harp and timpani if necessary. One patch each, just to get your juices flowing.

    If the sus articulation sounds too languid on a particular instrument, add a stacc. layer in an empty slot, or create a simple sus / stacc switch. Substitute legato for sus later, when you've written the melodies. Keep it simple! You can always work on the arrangement details and sound later, but you need to produce some *music* first.

    Life is short. [;)]


  • I have an even more radical suggestion. Stop faffing around trying to be creative in Cubase. If you want to write orchestral music, write it. Don't sequence it. Write it. Once the creative process has been completed, then transfer your attention to Cubase and program the music properly. I can write a rough short score of 4 bars in a minute, or so, but that could take 10-20 minutes to program properly. How can I get any creative flow going if I am messing around with articulations, keyswitches, controllers etc.?

    Once you have programmed a few pieces, then you will have learned your own tricks, and sequencing will become quicker.

    Come to think of it, I have another suggestion. Stop trying to sequence your own music. Learn to use your tools by sequencing an existing piece of music. Not only will you only have one thing to achieve, rather than two, but you will also not be able to cheat by writing to the samples. If the original composer wrote it, you have to program it. This is a very good exercise to improve your skills.

    Good luck....!

    DG


  • Although I am not a "high-powered" user like some of the more accomplished composers that frequent this forum, I would still nonetheless echo what DG has said.  When writing a piece of music, write the piece, and don't worry about articulations or anything else.  You might want to consider working in a notation program using the stock sounds of that program - when writing, the actual sound, IMO, is not that important.

    Once the piece is completed, then translate it to a sequencer and begin the editing process.  Depending on how you think/work, if you do use keyswitches to change articulations, setting those on an additional staff line for each part in the notation program could also be of use - but this does take time, and assumes that you are not playing the parts into the sequencer yourself.

    When working with articulations - and this is especially true with the full libraries - it can get very detailed and complicated, and is not something to deal with when composing.


  • I do agree about the notation program, but the problems, what is the best notation program that is perfectly interfaced with VSL

    I have tried Notion SLE, ok for a small quator, no good for a long and/or large piece.  I prefer to work with Logic* !

    So what is the solution ?

    after that Logic 7 came out I was hoping that Logic 8 will give a solution ; now we are still waiting for Logic X since a year hoping that there will be a solution.

    Best

    Cyril

    * I have spend days building an environment in Logic so it is more easy to use with VSL


    MacBook Pro M3 MAX 128 GB 8TB - 2 x 48" screen --- Logic Pro --- Mir Pro 3D --- Most of the VI libs, a few Synch... libs --- Quite a few Kontakt libs --- CS80 fanatic
  • I take DG's point, but some people prefer to hear their composition as it takes shape rather than write it all out on paper first. Dstorfer said, "I used to make a ton of music on a hardward sequencer with a 24 character LCD screen. And I was great at it." That being the case, he should have no problem working with Cubase or Logic, regardless of what version he has. A good notation program may or may not help in this case - what say you, Mr. Dstorfer?


  • last edited
    last edited

    @Conquer said:

    I take DG's point, but some people prefer to hear their composition as it takes shape rather than write it all out on paper first. Dstorfer said, "I used to make a ton of music on a hardward sequencer with a 24 character LCD screen. And I was great at it." That being the case, he should have no problem working with Cubase or Logic, regardless of what version he has. A good notation program may or may not help in this case - what say you, Mr. Dstorfer?

    That's easily fixed as well. If you can make a lot of music using a hardware sequencer with comparatively few sounds, then do the same again, and only transfer them music to VSL when it's written.

    You can put a few extra piano tracks at the bottom of the project marked Strings A, Strings B, Woodwinds A etc. to keep the orchestration clear in your head, and you will find that this will allow the music to take shape much more quickly than trying to sequence each part individually.

    You can also use a notation program with GM playback, which should allow you to hear what you've written as soon as yo have played it.

    DG


  • Is there is a compatility between GM and VSL, I never heard of that !


    MacBook Pro M3 MAX 128 GB 8TB - 2 x 48" screen --- Logic Pro --- Mir Pro 3D --- Most of the VI libs, a few Synch... libs --- Quite a few Kontakt libs --- CS80 fanatic
  • last edited
    last edited

    @Cyril said:

    Is there is a compatility between GM and VSL, I never heard of that !

    I never meant to suggest that they were compatible, so sorry if it read that way. What I was trying to say was that if you want rudimentary playback, it is sufficient. Obviously when you want high quality playback you have to organise all your patch changes properly, but as the OP is using Cubase, it is less of a problem than with a sequencer that doesn't use VST Expression.

    DG


  •  I definitely agree with the general line of the comments above.

    I think it is important to separate the compositional process from the technical process of rendering the sounds. It is tempting to want to hear things as they progress but I would keep this to a minimum with some basic sounds.

    I work on pieces with pencil and ms paper and Sibelius and only when I fairly satisfied do I move to a  midi export to Cubase and samples.

    Of course you can still edit the music as you go along but composing and rendering sounds are very different art forms.

    I think a lot of your frustration comes from mixing the two.

    Best

    Kanon


  • Thank you all for the input. I think Conquer probably has a similar work style so I will try his first suggestion first. Limiting the patches may bring me closer to what it was like with my old synths.

    @DG - I have programmed a few pages of Mozart's clarinet concerto. That was easy, especially with the expression maps. For me, it's during the initial creative process that I'm frustrated with the tools, but here's why a lot of these suggestions might be challenging for me unless I reboot my whole brain:

    For one thing, I've never "written music" down, per se, I've always played, composed, recorded, sequenced, etc.. all at once. I do know music theory quite well as a jazz pianist and 3 yrs as a music major, and can write notation, but I don't really hear ideas in my head and can't get them down like that. For me, it was always easy to mess around on the keyboard until I found a few motifs that I liked, then develop them through improv and happy accidents. I'd start with a framework of the piece in the sequencer, then keep playing and recording different instrument tracks - just letting stuff fall out of my fingers in a rough draft. Then I'd go back, harvest the good stuff, and reproduce the good accidents in a cleaner way -- rinse, repeat. Something about Cubase (and Cakewalk) stops that process and I don't know why.

    I certainly admire those who can just compose with notation or paper or just on piano, but I don't think I can do that. I'm fairly jealous of those who can, including my dad with perfect pitch.  

    @Kanon - I don't think my intention was to fully render the piece as I wrote it, it was more that VSL presented me with these tools that I thought I had to use this way. I think Conquer's suggestion to use 1 articulation per track is good. In the old days if I needed some pizz, I would just do it on another track, which is probably exactly how I still should be doing it, at least for the initial writing. Or maybe I'll just use simpler sounds in Halion and forget about all these keyswitches.


  • >I certainly admire those who can just compose with notation or paper or just on piano, but I don't think I can do that.

    No problem, you should stick to the method that works for you. It doesn't matter how you get there as long as some music comes out in the end! Personally I compose the same way as you do, by improvising, consolidating then sequencing the results. I too have had moments when the sheer complexity of my MIDI set-up has started to be counter-productive, and when that happens I just go back to basics and work with a very simple template. Stick to your guns and don't feel you need to compete technically - at the end of the day the samples are just tools to help you achieve your creative aims, not an obstacle that you have to overcome. Good luck with your musical endeavours! [Y]


  • last edited
    last edited

    @kanon said:

    I think a lot of your frustration comes from mixing the two.

    Did you try MIR ?

    There is a free trial

    I love it ! hardly any more mixing !


    MacBook Pro M3 MAX 128 GB 8TB - 2 x 48" screen --- Logic Pro --- Mir Pro 3D --- Most of the VI libs, a few Synch... libs --- Quite a few Kontakt libs --- CS80 fanatic
  • I spend a good bit of time setting up the orchestration first. I enjoy it, a lot. I'm going for a sound first. I don't have a single overarching template. the template might be based on a previous one and as far as a Cubase template it's just a matter of opening that prior project and repopulating it.

    While I did compose via notation for years, I don't at all today. As far as detail in articulations, and I do make very convincing solo work, I input the lines with a good legato where available and as things occur to me I pencil them [keyswitches, CC11...] in in the key editor. I don't have a preconception in a score type of form to satisfy, I improvise lines and the idea of the right articulation is of a piece with the creation, but directly with the sound.

    Over the time I've had tools such as VSL, I've grown with them. I think the preconception of everything ready to go rather than just start with the idea and THEN flesh it out and make it 'big' is the biggest obstacle you've put up for yourself here.


  • Unlike some users here, I believe one really must 'write to the samples' and not expect to realise satisfactorily, an orchestral score that is conceived for real instruments. Unless of course, one is just making a demo for the real thing. I've yet to hear any programmer or library come close to an instrument in the hands of a musician. A good orchestrator should write well for the instruments at his/her disposal. If these are virtual instrument then it is a mistake to try to make them compete with the real thing. At least as far as the fine detail and nuance is concerned. Besides, the painstaking tweaking that is required to make music scored for real instruments sound realistic, is tedious and time consuming. These are just some personal thoughts and I appreciate that the software has come a long way and others will disagree with my opinions.

  • that's some belief, because you don't enjoy this work very much, 'one' must not have the expectation for realism... which I actually achieve in every work.

    you need to get out more, you'd be surprised what people can do with some work, particularly if they enjoy that work more than anything in the world.


  • I'd like to hear some of your work if it's available. I'm not trying to be critical of people who enjoy using virtual instruments, that would be silly as I'm one of them. But would you not agree that given the choice, the real thing is preferable? Therefore we can only approximate. If you've recorded live musicians (good ones) you'll agree that V.Instruments, though good for background stuff, are a long way from a real performance. I am only responding to the notion that it is a mistake to write to the samples any more than it is to write to the musician.

  • What's so great about realism anyway? You can make fabulous music with orchestral samples without attempting to closely mimic the sound of real players.


  • last edited
    last edited

    @Conquer said:

    What's so great about realism anyway? You can make fabulous music with orchestral samples without attempting to closely mimic the sound of real players.

    This is an interesting discussion and one that probably has no resolution.  This is where I fall.  I'm thrilled to have VSL (SE) sounds at my disposal and am very satisfied with the results I get out of Finale.  It gives me and any clients a reasonable demonstration of what the music will sound like with real players although some imagination is still required of course. 

    Personally I've never tried to write to the samples but tried to write with an ear toward real players.  It can be frustrating at times and extra work to "hammer" the samples into submission but worth it in the end.  I'd say my craft has improved because of this technology.  I wish I'd had this in college.


  • The orchestral music begins with writing good arrangement, you can do this on paper or record it using piano. Once you have this sketch, you must know a lot about orchestration so you are able to put right voices to right instruments. If you dont know how to compose, arrange and orchestrate, it doesnt matter if you have all articulations and best of the best sound banks - you simply dont know what to do [:S] So listen to music a lot of orchestral music, study orchestral scores, practice harmony.....etc. etc.

    If you know enough about theory and you have practice in writing music {not sequencing} your workflow should be easy. After I record musical phrases I am listening to those phrases and record all controllers I want {xfade, expression, etc.} sometimes one by one sometimes simoutaneously two or more at once {sure you need fader controler with more than one fader for this}. Keyswitches are made in realitme and sometimes by entering. As you can see there is no tutorial for this, because every instrumentation every phrase needs different approach.

    But firstly you must have clear idea of sound in your mind and then you just reproduce it into sequencer. VSL and other banks are not holy grails, you must have extraordinary musical knowledge to create extraordinary compositons. VSL is just simply best orchestral tool to accomplish your musical ideas in orchestration world.

    One good advice that helped me - try to recreate some scores that wrote masters {Beethoven, Brahms, Prokofiev, Ravel, etc. etc.} You will be surprised what you can learn from it....

    thats my toughts....