1. Didja accidentally blow through the whole, "We're using our real names" thing on registration? No problem, just send me (Mike) a Conversation message and I'll get you sorted, by which I mean hammered-into-obedient-line because I'm SO about having a lot of individuality-destroying, oppressive shit all over my forum.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. You're only as good as the harshest criticism you're willing to hear.
    Dismiss Notice

Orchestration Project with Redbanned members (Update 1.st post)

Discussion in 'Tips, Tricks & Talk' started by Alexander Schiborr, Aug 29, 2017.

  1. #81 Claude Ruelle, Nov 6, 2017
    Last edited: Nov 6, 2017
    Great job Alex!

    I don't think I'm gonna have enough time to work on this one, so I decided to listen to your version and I thought I could give you a little bit of feedback.

    0:00 to 0:14 - I really like it. The orchestration sounds great and I'm really getting in the mood!

    0:14 to 0:23 - So this is half composition, half orchestration - I think that the rhythmical change here is a bit abrupt and incongruous. I totally get what you mean and what kind of music you are referring to but I'm sure there's a way to get into that section more smoothly. I think this is mainly a composition issue as I had the same feeling listening to the piano sketch. Also you're moving the melody a bit too quickly between the different sections, which makes me lose the focus.

    0:24 - I don't think pizz would work here...

    0:44 - I feel like a real glock in that range wouldn't resonate the way you want it to.

    1:04 - Here too I feel a little bit of an abrupt change in the rhythm. I think you could have introduced the triplets earlier in the piece so that they would make more sense in that build.

    The rest of the piece sounds good to me. That's an amazing job overall! Don't take my criticism too seriously as I'm not an expert, but this is what I feel I can give you with the little knowledge I have.


    Claude.
     
    Rohann van Rensburg likes this.
  2. Thanks for the listening and feedback.
    To your points:
    1. Spot: Yes I think the thing is fine there, agreed.
    2. Spot: Yes I feel the same way since I did add those violins on the previous bars before. While they are great, they corrupt the thing which you mentioned and create that problem. Way to fix: Either kick out the Violin lines before which create expactation or..if I want to keep those..which I want! :D Then..the transition has to be smoother..not sure yet how to fix that.
    3. Spot: Yes..probably it would make sense to prepare those low "stomps" 2 bars before on the low woods or something..just to prepare them. Or if I kick them out..then hmm, how to fill up the long notes..with counterlines..a little bit to early to introduce counterlines for my taste as the theme appears the first time. Not sure. Any idea?
    4. Spot: Oh..the pizzi..I guess you mean you can´t hear them..Normally I would say yes..but they are in their very high registers, so I thought to do that. But I will fix that.
    5. Spot: Not sure what you mean witht the glock. The glock is a doubler here. Do you mean that I should leave it out? Not clear.
    6. Spot: Well, yes..you can it do more sexy..Track has actually one tempo..which is part of the problem in that spot. When you let breath the parts more at the end by slowing down the tempo it would work better. Another point is ..in an update I allready kicked out those stupid winds there..there make just confusion and add nothing good. But I will work on that spots.
    Thank you again,much appreciated.
     
  3. #83 Alexander Schiborr, Nov 7, 2017
    Last edited: Nov 7, 2017
    Hey Claude,
    I worked on some of the stuff you mentioned:



    I also added a tempo map and I polished the sound. Apart from the orchestrational elements. How do you feel about the polished sound? Is a bit off topic. But I need some input on that actually. I kept the old version for comparison. Thank you.
     
    Aaron Venture likes this.
  4. Hey!

    Orchestrationally, I think it's definitely better. The first version sounded good to me, this one sounds a bit more treble and louder and I think it's fine. Just be careful about the loudness, cause I can hear that you are clipping (or almost) at some places. Also about the overall sound, I still think that Spitfire samples are too wet, which kind of annoys me cause I feel like I cannot hear all the details in your piece.

    Don't get me wrong, I know the hassle; I use Spitfire Redux in my current template and it's such a pain to make it sit properly in the mix. The close mics are very very close and the Decca tree is super wet, that makes it super hard to find the right balance.

    Anyway, hope that helps.
     
  5. So I had a bit time today and wrote another 2 hand piano piece which I will orchestrate I think. Anyone wants to joing the party?

    Here is the draft for piano:

     
  6. I'm still fighting to figure out the tempo of Fanfare for a man. :(
     
    Paul T McGraw likes this.
  7. What problems with the tempo? What is not clear? I will help :)
     
  8. Hey! I might have some time to try this one. Could you share the MIDI?
     
  9. Claude Ruelle likes this.
  10. I need to enter notes one by one in my sequencer. To do that, I listen to your fanfare and I clap my hands to understand how this stuff should be notated on a staff, and I fail every time.
     
  11. This is how I heard it and what I used.

    upload_2017-11-14_19-3-3.png
     
    Alexander Schiborr likes this.
  12. Thanks Alex and Aaron. Your answers are really helpful. I never did non straight tempo music, it's quite a challenge for me.
     
    Alexander Schiborr likes this.
  13. Screen Shot 2017-11-15 at 00.43.26.png
    Not that it matters (as Alexander said, it was mostly freeform), but just out of curiosity I looked at the recording (the one with the Bernard Herrmann library) and I think it might be close to this notation, rhythm-wise. It’s interesting because the first one is a little bit off, but the others seem to fall in this rhythm pretty well, more or less. Oh, and I didn't double check the notes.
    But "freeform" does indeed sound better, and this was just a counting exercise for me :D

    If I find the time in the next few days, I'll try to orchestrate this last piece! I never tried orchestrating anything in this thread, but it looks like a lot of fun! :)
     
  14. Yes, exactly it is freeform. And the reason I used that was the way how I wanted to have a more meaning for those 2 short low notes. I wanted them "to mean" something. When you write this thing very strict to bar or click then imo it looses a bit of the impact message. Also I worked on countless midi renderings and created clones of real recordings and while working on that I painstakingly analyzed the way how real orchestras behave to tempo.
    Yes and my renderings for this things are indeed not..that super in line with a count. I can make that happen..Just set click and I do that. I guess it will sound very different probably more in line..for the count but less suitable for the feeling. But nobody is forced to do it exactly like that. I appreciate other version of course and if someone has an idea to say: Hey this is even cooler, than this is aweseoooome :D!
     
  15. Yes of course, I didn't mean to judge you or criticise it in any way! I just did it as an end to itself. It does feel natural, and I was just curious if there was a way to notate it without adding tons of rubato (etc.). It wasn't to say that it wasn't played in tempo, my point was that you wanted that particular rhythm and the proof is that you consistently played it in that manner!

    It doesn't matter, it was just a little experiment :)
     
  16. I didn´t take it as a critic. No worries I am never feeling critisized with something. ;)
     
    Francesco Bortolussi likes this.
  17. #98 Alexander Schiborr, Nov 15, 2017
    Last edited: Nov 15, 2017

Share This Page