|
Post by Bob Porter on Jul 4, 2018 1:53:01 GMT
I deleted the other thread and am re-posting the final version here. I have spent much time tweaking this file. Frankly, I can't do much more. I know Daw folks are wondering why bother. I get it. I agree. Do I have top of the line samples? Hardly. Are they available? Many are. Out of my price range, however. What most Sibelius users don't know is that there are many ways to adjust notes. For every note of every staff these adjustments are available: Velocity, note start (+ and -), duration (+ and - ). As well as reading most normal staff texts. Normal and legato attack and release for each string section. Near, far, overhead, talkback mics for drum sets. And many more. I think most users don't avail themselves of these because it's not the point of NS. I'm just trying to do the best with what I have. soundcloud.com/user-737777673/love-theme-4
|
|
|
Post by gx on Jul 4, 2018 15:39:15 GMT
Nice work, Bob. That transition bit i mentioned earlier, now fits seamlessly. I was w it until 2'30" .. where for 10 seconds you lost me.. After that, 2'40" onwards, I felt the orchestration could be thicker - to give a fuller sense to that climatic ending. Maybe add more percussion to balance out the cymbal - which to my ears, sticks out a bit too much - but with more going on, I think would work fine.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Porter on Jul 4, 2018 21:09:12 GMT
Thanks much for your input.
This piece seems to be too much for my laptop. I am loosing definition. If I do any more I'll have to switch to the big guns. I pumped up the cymbal, maybe too much. There is also bass drum and timp going on.
By the way this is a small orchestra. Perhaps to do what I want I need full brass and WW.
Does the opening seem expressive enough?
|
|
|
Post by gx on Jul 5, 2018 14:57:23 GMT
Oh - I see about the laptop's limitations… Yes, I felt this version had far more expressiveness in the opening (than the previous). Very noticeable.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Dexter on Jul 5, 2018 16:50:07 GMT
Can we have a score of sorts? Rough is fine. Wonder of wonders, I can sometimes identify potential orchestration weaknesses better on score than a mockup.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Porter on Jul 6, 2018 14:23:48 GMT
Love Theme 4 - Full Score.pdf (133.15 KB) Here ya go. This score is marked up to get Sibelius to do what I want. There are also hidden things in the file that define hair pins and fermatas. A real orchestra would not need so much direction. As I think of it, xylophone, full brass and some cannon fire mght be a nice touch. gx, the section at 2:30 is a modulation to the new key. The first modulation is a half step up and after many failed attempts, I decided to just jump the half step. At 2:30, there begins a modulation up a full step. I have dim memories of how to do this. My training was some 45 years ago. I haven't really used it much since.
|
|
|
Post by driscollmusick on Jul 6, 2018 15:52:58 GMT
Hi Bob,
Sorry I'm late to the thread here. Are you looking for feedback on the orchestration or just the mock-up?
John
|
|
|
Post by Bob Porter on Jul 6, 2018 17:24:43 GMT
John, You can make any comments you like. I mostly re-posted here to get NS users to expand what is possible with their software. My goal is to make the file less objectionable. But it begs the question of what is more important, the actual notes or what we think we hear. Each of us brings a long list of baggage to each thing we hear. For example, I don't care for piano music. That doesn't at all mean that I don't think that there is any good piano music. I'd just rather listen to something else. We (myself included) tend to disparage GM output. Ignoring the fact that that the actual notes might be wonderful. The same notes arranged for even GM piano would be more to our liking. NS users are more interested in a score. That's the point. We aren't really in need of a polished sound file. Yet, true composers ( of which I'm not one ) don't write to what they hear, they write to what they know to be true. Many high priced sound fonts are also available for NS. And noteperformer, which I don't really care for, claims to read notes more realistically. So are we after realism, or good notes? Can realism cover bad notes? Are these all stupid questions? Probably. At my age my hearing is going, my eyesight is not what it used to be, and my brain....well we won't go there. So I'm just kind of blubbering on.
|
|
|
Post by rayinstirling on Jul 6, 2018 21:18:48 GMT
Bob, we’re you born an apologist or did it come with your copy of NotePerformer? Well, I know it doesn’t come with NotePerformer or I would also be afflicted :-) It is possible to create a relatively acceptable orchestral mock-up using NotePerformer but it requires a degree of marking on the chart over and above that required when asking real performers to play. No shortcuts, no delegation of responsibility. You must be the composer, orchestrator and conductor.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Porter on Jul 6, 2018 23:41:13 GMT
I think it's clear I don't own NP. I'm not convinced it's worth the money. So my question is, are the first 16 measures of this piece "acceptable"? There's always room for improvement. There is way more in the file than what you see in the score.
|
|
|
Post by fuguestate on Jul 19, 2018 21:19:22 GMT
Finally got round to this again. This is much better than the previous version(s)! Your hard work is paying off. I quite like it, except for the climax at the end, where it sounds like you fell into the trap of trying to maximize everything in order to blast the music into glory, but it didn't quite work. The thing is... I've learned over time that the most effective climaxes are not defined by absolute volume (thickness of scoring, texture, harmony, etc.), but by how big of a contrast they make with immediately-preceding material. An ff immediately following a p sounds a lot louder than an fff following an ff. So instead of throwing everything and the kitchen sink right at the beginning of the climactic passage, try holding back until the last moments before everything converges with a loud bang. You can intersperse "intermediate" bangs in the middle occasionally, but don't keep them held throughout. Space them out, and save the most powerful gestures for last. Also, long held notes tend to fade into the background and lose a lot of their perceived power, even if physically speaking they continue contributing the same amount of soundwaves into the mix. I think this has to do with how our brains tune out after a while if continually impinged with the same stimuli. So for your climactic passage at the end, I recommend breaking up the long notes, and add more interesting background stuff, like woodwind runs / figures in the upper register to fill out the top of the spectrum, more movement in the bass parts to fill out the lower spectrum, and thicker scoring in the middle to fill in the middle spectrum. This last part can make a huge difference if you do it right: I've found that spreading all instruments more-or-less equally throughout every octave doesn't actually sound as thick as you might think. Instead, if you fill out the middle register, it will add a lot of (perceived) thickness, even if the tops and bottoms of the range have only 1 or 2 lines. This has probably to do with our ears being more sensitive to the middle frequencies than the extreme high / extreme low frequencies. Side-note: at around 1:30, I really liked the transition to a faster tempo... but couldn't help feeling that it could have just a tad more countrapuntal work for added interest. Perhaps even a ... ok, ok, you know what I'm gonna say. I don't think you'll take my advice, which is OK, but I really felt a fugal texture, even if merely a fake one, would do wonders to this particular passage. Or just good ole, plain old counterpoint (have some secondary voices echo off the main motifs in the background -- that could be enough).
|
|
|
Post by Bob Porter on Jul 20, 2018 19:54:19 GMT
All good points. Thanks. As I think about it, I believe that a big problem is that I'm trying to do too much with too few resources. Everything starts to sound the same because I have to use the same instruments. When I add more brass, we'll see, but I suspect the bass drone will stay. At most, it might get some rhythm.
And as you recall the full title involves a sea chase. Hence the tempo change.
|
|