Hey, YoungProdigy here. Just finished "A Peaceful Village". I usually write aggressive orchestral themes; but I decided to write a peaceful theme this time. I tried to add more expression to the instruments, than my last piece.

You can listen to it here:
https://soundcloud.com/youngprodigymusic/young-prodigy-a-peaceful-village

As always, feedback is welcome.

Nice and peaceful piece of music.

Again I hear that you haven't tweaked the velocities and attacks that carefully. For example in the first theme I hear that some notes are barely audible because they are shorter than the others and the swelling sample doesn't have enough time to get to its full volume. You could use key switches to have swelling samples where needed and faster samples when the line is more legato and shorter notes.

Or maybe it's because of velocities are too low on those short notes. Anyways, I challenge you to tweak it just a little bit more and post a new version, just to see where you can get with a little bit more attention to detail :)

The thing with EWQLSO is that there seem to be three velocities. Extremely soft, normal and extremely loud. So tweaking those velocities will make it sound even less realistic.

I don't think it has to do with attacks. I think it more has to do with how EWQL reacts to CC11. Without the Xfd patches; notes don't seem to realistically swell.

The short notes were trying to emulate shorter violin notes.

But I'm just using the composer trial for EWQLSO. I think I'll go for Hollywood Orchestra in the long run. It would just be easier to do more convincing stuff.

The thing with EWQLSO is that there seem to be three velocities. Extremely soft, normal and extremely loud. So tweaking those velocities will make it sound even less realistic.

There are a lot more than just three velocities in EWQLSO. I agree that the music is nice and peaceful but the production value could be improved. Overall, nice track!

The thing with EWQLSO is that there seem to be three velocities. Extremely soft, normal and extremely loud. So tweaking those velocities will make it sound even less realistic.

There are a lot more than just three velocities in EWQLSO. I agree that the music is nice and peaceful but the production value could be improved. Overall, nice track!

Well to me it sounds like mainly three velocities. There may be more than 3 velocities; but they're drastically different in volume, which is unrealistic.

Nice and peaceful piece of music.

Again I hear that you haven't tweaked the velocities and attacks that carefully. For example in the first theme I hear that some notes are barely audible because they are shorter than the others and the swelling sample doesn't have enough time to get to its full volume. You could use key switches to have swelling samples where needed and faster samples when the line is more legato and shorter notes.

Or maybe it's because of velocities are too low on those short notes. Anyways, I challenge you to tweak it just a little bit more and post a new version, just to see where you can get with a little bit more attention to detail :)

The thing with EWQLSO is that there seem to be three velocities. Extremely soft, normal and extremely loud. So tweaking those velocities will make it sound even less realistic.

I don't think it has to do with attacks. I think it more has to do with how EWQL reacts to CC11. Without the Xfd patches; notes don't seem to realistically swell.

The short notes were trying to emulate shorter violin notes.

But I'm just using the composer trial for EWQLSO. I think I'll go for Hollywood Orchestra in the long run. It would just be easier to do more convincing stuff.

No, no and no... Did you use just one patch or did you try key switching patches so you can switch a better sample for shorter notes? If you don't want to learn how to do this with EWQLSO you're not going to do it with Hollywood orchestra either.

"notes don't seem to realistically swell" Yes they do exactly as they are supposed to do, you just need to choose an appropriate sample for each note to get the best out of it.

There is just so much of little articulation stuff that an (virtual) orchestrator needs to think when getting the string tracks right. Soft, hard, short, long, crescendo, diminuendo, trills, staccato, all the different bowing styles and positions etc. It's hard work to try to find the right stuff for each note, but gladly the key switch patches make it at least a little bit easier. And when you do it a while you start to learn where everything is in the sample library and it gets quicker.

Not to say that I can do it perfectly or even good, but it's just so much easier to point out stuff from other peoples music. I tend to become a bit deaf to my own music when doing it and listening it so many times so I don't even know anymore how every note should sound when the piece plays in my head so clearly.

"No, no and no" well it sounds like it to me. On most instruments if I slightly change the velocity, there's a huge difference in volume. You can tell me that's not the case; but that's what I hear.

If I use CC11, the notes don't swell realistically. I've tried to do mockups and just using CC11; the notes don't realistically swell.

You are right there are so many little articulations. A violinist can play marcato, legato, portamento, stacatto and other articulations. The legato script in EWQLSO just doesn't sound like a real violinist. Realistic portamento is limited to fixed speed slide samples. You mentioned bowing; that's another thing EWQL lacks. There is no up and down bowing samples for sustained strings.

Hollywood Strings has more convincing legato. The gold version also has up and down bowing samples.

The point is; is let's face it, no matter how much CC11 data I use, I'm not going to convince you it's a real string section with EWQLSO.

So until I get something like Hollywood Strings; I'm going to give up on making realistic string melodies. Hollywood Strings would make it easier to do convincing mockups like I said before.

It seems like a waste of time to try and make realistic strings with something that's not up to par.

YoungProdigy - you've been posting your music here for a long time, and I appreciate that! But I've gotta be honest about something that's been bothering me:

You say feedback is welcomed but when that feedback is given you almost always have a rebuttal. You almost always argue why that person's feedback is invalid for some reason or another. This certainly doesn't make it seem like feedback is actually welcomed, as you claim. You just got EWQLSO and have barely starting working with it. I'd strongly urge you to take some time to learn how the sample library works and the pros and cons of that (and any!) sample library you use. I used EWQLSO for over a decade and have found it very useful. It didn't fit every need compositionally, of course, so over the years I've been adding more and more libraries to fill in some of those gaps.

Part of this is very normal! When I hear the demos of a new sample library, I get super pumped! Then I get the actual library and there's always a bit of disappointment as I discover I have to learn how to use that library better and figure out what samples/approaches help achieve the best results. There are plenty of examples of great sounding music that use virtual instruments. What is the difference between some of these tracks and your music? Production value. Better use of automation. Better use of reverbs and delays. Better use of EQ and compression settings.

To be blunt (again), it almost reads like you want a sample library that will convey ultra realism and help you convey a live orchestra sound via a virtual instrument library. Young, that sample library simply doesn't exist. At least not yet. Every single product out there will require some level of production to help make your music have more impact.

So until I get something like Hollywood Strings; I'm going to give up on making realistic string melodies. Hollywood Strings would make it easier to do convincing mockups like I said before.

This is the worst kind of reaction you can have. Instead, strive to make your best music with the tools you have while constantly learning and seeing how you can make your current skill set and toolset better. Finally, I'll leave you with this bit of advice - you don't have to make your orchestral music sound realistic to have impact with your audience.

Thanks,

Nate

BTW - I picked the Morrowind OST on purpose because it came out in 2002 and didn't use live orchestra for the OST due to budget constraints. Take a listen. You'll hear dynamic music with sample libraries that are, by today's standards, pretty obsolete. In many of your rebuttals to the feedback you've gotten on this forum, you seem to blame the sample libraries whereas we're all trying to get you to see that the production and the way(s) you're using these sample libraries is a huge factor.

Hope that helps!

Nate

YoungProdigy - you've been posting your music here for a long time, and I appreciate that! But I've gotta be honest about something that's been bothering me:

You say feedback is welcomed but when that feedback is given you almost always have a rebuttal. You almost always argue why that person's feedback is invalid for some reason or another. This certainly doesn't make it seem like feedback is actually welcomed, as you claim. You just got EWQLSO and have barely starting working with it. I'd strongly urge you to take some time to learn how the sample library works and the pros and cons of that (and any!) sample library you use. I used EWQLSO for over a decade and have found it very useful. It didn't fit every need compositionally, of course, so over the years I've been adding more and more libraries to fill in some of those gaps.

Part of this is very normal! When I hear the demos of a new sample library, I get super pumped! Then I get the actual library and there's always a bit of disappointment as I discover I have to learn how to use that library better and figure out what samples/approaches help achieve the best results. There are plenty of examples of great sounding music that use virtual instruments. What is the difference between some of these tracks and your music? Production value. Better use of automation. Better use of reverbs and delays. Better use of EQ and compression settings.

To be blunt (again), it almost reads like you want a sample library that will convey ultra realism and help you convey a live orchestra sound via a virtual instrument library. Young, that sample library simply doesn't exist. At least not yet. Every single product out there will require some level of production to help make your music have more impact.

So until I get something like Hollywood Strings; I'm going to give up on making realistic string melodies. Hollywood Strings would make it easier to do convincing mockups like I said before.

This is the worst kind of reaction you can have. Instead, strive to make your best music with the tools you have while constantly learning and seeing how you can make your current skill set and toolset better. Finally, I'll leave you with this bit of advice - you don't have to make your orchestral music sound realistic to have impact with your audience.

Thanks,

Nate

To be truthful, I never stated his feedback was invalid. I'm being realistic. I'm not going to convince anyone it's a live string section with EWQLSO. Isn't that the point to convince someone that's it's a real string section? If so, I can't do it with the EWQLSO. That's just being realistic. I'm not talking out of thin air. I've tried to do mockups in EWQL, using every script and every articulation; but the mockups are not convincing.

In my experience with EWQL, simply using CC11 does not produce a realistic swell on keyswitching patches. In my opinion the velocity layers have drastically different volumes. How can you argue against that?

You asked what is the difference my music and other music using virtual instruments? Mainly the samples. Those other songs using virtual instruments have more realistic samples.

I've actually read up on the violin and have watched videos of a real violinist playing. There's simply things that can't be done realistically in EWQLSO. String melodies are one of those things.

The truth is that, something like Hollywood Strings Gold would give me a way more realistic sound. With more realistic legato, more articulations and sampled runs; I could get a way more convincing sound.

I just don't see the point spending hours trying to make realistic strings, with subpar string samples. Without something like Hollywood Strings or LASS; I'll almost always get "This or that sounds fake".

The production can be better yes. But there are simply some things that won't sound realistic in EWQL such as string melodies. But I don't even think Kasu commented on the production.

Now don't get me wrong. If you have a song with a lot of short articulations, can it sound realistic? Yes. But when you need to make convincing legato passages; it simply can't be done.

What actually would help me is improving my compositional skills. Trying to get a "live orchestra" sound from a library that's not capable; doesn't help me improve.

To be truthful, I never stated his feedback was invalid. I'm being realistic.

Actually, you're being argumentative. When folks, with more experience and credentials, are trying to help steer you in the right direction(s) that worked for them and are only meant with rebuttals it feels (and seems) like you're just dismissing that advice. I've seen several folks I admire and respect, who are making good music, reach out to you with ideas and suggestions - only to have you rebuke those tips. And that's really too bad.

You asked what is the difference my music and other music using virtual instruments? Mainly the samples. Those other songs using virtual instruments have more realistic samples.

Sorry but you're wrong. And for you to make this comment shows that, despite repeatedly trying to explain and give you ideas for how your productions are lacking, you're just not getting it.

Without something like Hollywood Strings or LASS; I'll almost always get "This or that sounds fake".

Sorry to bust your bubble but I have LASS and Hollywood Strings and they can sound extremely fake without the right production.

I feel like I'm beating a dead horse with this discussion, honestly. I've made many various suggestions to you over the many different threads in the forum. I do appreciate you trying EWQLSO but truly feel you haven't really dug deep enough into the program.

Here's a suite of symphonic works I made using EWQLSO as my main sound palette. Not saying it's perfect. In fact, listening again four years later, I can hear tons of production things I wish I would've done differently. Done better. But the music can be impactful. I've been told as much by many folks. Not trying to toot my own horn (pun intended) but my point is we've shown you many times how less-than-realistic sample libraries can still produce great sounding, impactful music.

http://madsenstudios.bandcamp.com/album/along-this-path

I do wish you the best but am getting frustrated that you don't receive feedback better, honestly. I've said my bit and will leave it at that.

Thanks,

Nate