# Making computer compositions sound more realistic?



## chillowack

I compose with Finale, but while I appreciate the program as a whole, the instruments don't sound very realistic.

I'm wondering if anyone here has a program they put their Finale or Sibelius compositions through, to make them sound more authentic?

If so: what program do you use?


----------



## Aramis

Realistic to what extent? 

That you will be able to hear all colouristic and harmonic details that you find important but they don't sound as you intended when played by computer? You can't, with no program.

That people will listen the composition played by software and enjoy it like performed by musicians? You can't, with no program.

Finale is generally as good as it gets. 

Accept the fact that it's only very limited substitute and instead of asking such treated questions put effort to play the piece yourself or make other musicians play it for you.


----------



## chillowack

If you think Finale is "as good as it gets" in terms of realistic-sounding instruments, then I respectfully disagree with you, Aramis (and in fact, hearing you say that, I wonder if you even _use_ Finale).

Finale doesn't really try to make their instruments sound that real: it's a notation program, it's not really about realism.

A program like Synful, on the other hand, has achieved an authenticity which to me is astonishing--light years beyond Finale, in terms of realism. (So real-sounding that in many cases you can't tell it's a computer.)

So what I'm wondering is whether anyone here uses Synful--or one of the other programs out there that generate more realistic instrument sounds than Finale does.

As for playing the piece myself: I'm talking about orchestral compositions, not piano pieces. And as for paying others to play them for me: you may have that kind of cash lying around, but I sure don't!


----------



## Aramis

> and in fact, hearing you say that, I wonder if you even use Finale


I DO! :tiphat:



> Finale doesn't really try to make their instruments sound that real


And that is why it's as good as it gets. Because it doesn't try to. I've heard your music and it was stylized for classical period so I assume you care mostly about classical acoustic instruments like violin, piano, clarinet and stuff, not some modern inventions. What makes these instruments sound like they sound is fact that they are acoustic, nothing that is not acoustic will ever sound realistic. That is why you will never be satisfied if you are sensitive for quality of sound.



> And as for paying others to play them for me: you may have that kind of cash lying around, but I sure don't!


Who said that you have to rent symphonic orchestra for money? I thought that composers are paid for writing music to perform, not pay performers to do so. If you don't feel good enough to interest proper musicians with your music then you stick to Finale and with little help of this program (why do you even need any software?) get better.

I MEAN IT, IF YOU WANT TO BE WELCOMED IN HAVEN BY BEETHOVEN AFTER YOU DIE YOU BETTER GIVE YOURSELF A HAY AND STOP DISTURB YOUR THOUGHTS WITH SOFTWARE, OTHERWISE YOU SHALL BE LIKE OLD FISHMAN WHO CATCHED GOLDEN FISH AND HE WANTED MORE AND MORE UNTIL HE ENDED WITH NOTHING

I WARN YOU :tiphat:


----------



## chillowack

Thank you for sharing your opinions, Aramis.

Now I would like to let others share, if they have a mind to do so.


----------



## Ernie

I agree that true realism requires an orchestra or choir (or both). However, you can get a lot closer to a realistic representation of your music than is possible with Finale. Try this link - it includes orchestra and choir (with the choir singing the text instead of the Ooos and ahs we're all accustomed to). Truly remarkable, IMHO. There's nothing to click on this website - just wait a few seconds and the demos will begin playing.

Ernie


----------



## chillowack

Ernie, thank you so much for posting that link: I had no idea virtual choir technology had come that far. I agree it's quite remarkable.

(Then I got sidetracked by the "Fab Four" software down the page--being a huge Beatles fan, I found that thing delightful!)

Hollywood Strings sounds amazing as well: that's just the kind of thing I was looking for. (What a price tag though: $1600!)

I'm going to check out some of the other programs on that page; thanks again for pointing out that resource.


----------



## Ernie

Your welcome. I haven't been on that website for quite a while and it has changed a lot. They have (had) a series of demo videos that I downloaded that were terrific. I'm not sure they still offer them. Of course, as an ex-choral teacher, I was most interested in the application of text to choral. It seems this module is available for under $500.00. When I first saw this software it was $1,000 - way to rich for my blood.

Ernie


----------



## chillowack

That's encouraging that it's down to half-price...though $500 is still a pretty penny!

Ernie, do you do any composing these days?

If so, what programs (if any) do you use?


----------



## Ernie

chillowack said:


> That's encouraging that it's down to half-price...though $500 is still a pretty penny!
> 
> Ernie, do you do any composing these days?
> 
> If so, what programs (if any) do you use?


When i taught choral music (on the high school level) I did some composing but far more arranging. I still dabble in it from time to time, but nothing serious. I use Finale, and sometimes Sibelius. I find both of them very useful and, at the same time, quite irritating. I'm sure my irritation stems from my own lack of knowledge as to the finer workings of these programs. They've come a long, long, way since I started using music software in the 1980's. Some older members here may remember Personal Composer, Music Printer +, Encore, etc. All were great for their time but nothing like our software choices today.

Ernie


----------



## chillowack

I didn't even know software composing stretched as far back as the 80s.

The products today are awesome, but I'm sure in 10-20 years we'll look back on them and laugh.

Still...it's hard to imagine getting _too_ much better than such products as Synful and Hollywood Strings--they're so close to real already.


----------



## jurianbai

I am yet to use Finale or Sibelius to edit my MIDI file. I am using the old Cakewalk program to do that. When I want my Midi get played with more enhanced digital sound I will transfer my file to the Yamaha keyboard. So I guess if you are a composer or semi pro at least you own a digital keyboard with Midi input. This is the most real audio simulation can played by a machine if you ask me.


----------



## Ernie

jurianbai said:


> I am yet to use Finale or Sibelius to edit my MIDI file. I am using the old Cakewalk program to do that. When I want my Midi get played with more enhanced digital sound I will transfer my file to the Yamaha keyboard. So I guess if you are a composer or semi pro at least you own a digital keyboard with Midi input. This is the most real audio simulation can played by a machine if you ask me.


Actually there is no need to use Finale or Sibelius to edit your midi file. These two programs are really publishing programs - Cakewalk is a sequencer and editing a midi file is easier using a sequencer.

If you think the most realistic audio simulation can be had by importing your midi file into a Yamaha keyboard, you have much to learn. 

Ernie


----------



## MrVoize

MuseScore is a cool free midi/score manager that is similar to Finale. LMMS is another great freebie that is extremely powerful.

As for virtual instrument sounds, I've always had the best results just recording my own sample sets... very time consuming but worth it in the end.

As far as commercial packages go, nothing beats Kontakt. An extremely flexible tool that allows you to build your own instruments from scratch or take advantage of the huge library of pre packaged instruments (I think it now includes the Vienna symphonic library). One of these days if I have the $$$ I plan to purchase it myself.


----------



## David58117

Aramis said:


> Realistic to what extent?
> 
> That you will be able to hear all colouristic and harmonic details that you find important but they don't sound as you intended when played by computer? You can't, with no program.
> 
> That people will listen the composition played by software and enjoy it like performed by musicians? You can't, with no program.
> 
> Finale is generally as good as it gets.
> 
> Accept the fact that it's only very limited substitute and instead of asking such treated questions put effort to play the piece yourself or make other musicians play it for you.


Wrong wrong wrong!

Finale is basically just a midi editor - if you haven't purchased and linked it to a softsynth (or vst, or "symphonic instrument" etc etc), you're just going to get the same old canned midi that has been around for years and years.

Flash forward to today, and there have been many many companies that have done things such as visited world class orchestras and meticulously sampled players/sections playing each note at different dynamics, with various techniques, scales, in different locations etc etc. Of course the quality between the programs vary, and things progress fast, also you generally get what you pay for.

I haven't used finale in almost a decade, but now I pretty much just use MOTU Symphonic Instrument (around $250 or so, but older, wouldn't recommend), and Native Instrument Komplete 5 bundle (paid about $500 last year for it, it's a bundle of about 11 programs including Kontakt...although the piano library ("Akousic Piano") is lacking)). My favorite piano VST I used so far was Steinberg "The Grand 2," but there are some newer ones which look very promising.

Despite what Aramis said about non acoustic music, it's definitely an ill informed opinion as there are many well done guitar amp simulators if that's something you're going to need. The way they work is you plug in your guitar through an input on your computer, and the program outputs various true to life amps and their settings...in fact, Fender released their own recently which gives users access to all the old and classic fender amps, it's a very nice program.

Anyway, the stuff is out there, just remember not all of them are equal so try demos before you buy.

edit due to MrVoize above -

Kontakt is good but it has it's limitations, like any single program. My biggest gripe with it was trying to get solo stringed instruments..when you have a melody for a solo violin, and they only include sections playing various techniques, it really limits you....hence why I use multiple programs - MOTU has a solo section. Thankfully, Native Instruments just released an addition that includes solo instruments, but I don't want to pay for the update at this point.


----------



## GraemeG

Disclaimer: not a composer, not a software guru. Am a violinist...
I wonder whether these programmes attempt to emulate what can't really be done.
Here's the fr'instance. The orchestra I play in has a 'young composers workshop' we run once a year. Three young composers are chosen to have orchestral pieces - up to 10-15 mins worth of music - workshopped over about 3 3-hours sessions. They're all students, and so the parts arrive all nicely computer-generated - this is a great step forward!
But as to the music itself; some of the 'effects' strike me as things you might possibly hear through headphones listening to your software, but stand no chance in the real world. This year, one piece concluded with the first violins (my section) playing _divisi_ the following: repeated bar-long Octave Gs, both harmonics, the notes being the 4th ledger line above the stave, and the octave above that. Half the section was marked _pp_ swelling to _p_ and then back again, while against that the other half were _p_ dropping to _pp_ and then _cresc_ back to _p_.
Apart from the practicalities of playing such high harmonics at such low volumes, this notion of the octave pitches rising and falling against each other in volume, within such a narrow range; you could only hear it through headphones. We weren't the only instruments playing either. Daft.

If you want to write for orchestra, play in one! Learn what instruments can practically do, and practically not. Don't write the piccolo _ppp_ at the top of its range. Don't give a player two and a half beats to swap from oboe to cor anglais. Don't write notes that are out of range of the instrument. Yeah, I know Richard Strauss did it, but you're not Richard Strauss...

I reckon the computer is great for notation - especially if it can find the rests in the player's part and put them before the page-turn when printed out. But I'm not sure it's so good at truly conveying orchestral effects the way they will sound when played by people.
cheers,
G


----------



## Ernie

GraemeG said:


> Disclaimer: not a composer, not a software guru. Am a violinist...
> I wonder whether these programmes attempt to emulate what can't really be done.
> Here's the fr'instance. The orchestra I play in has a 'young composers workshop' we run once a year. Three young composers are chosen to have orchestral pieces - up to 10-15 mins worth of music - workshopped over about 3 3-hours sessions. They're all students, and so the parts arrive all nicely computer-generated - this is a great step forward!
> But as to the music itself; some of the 'effects' strike me as things you might possibly hear through headphones listening to your software, but stand no chance in the real world. This year, one piece concluded with the first violins (my section) playing _divisi_ the following: repeated bar-long Octave Gs, both harmonics, the notes being the 4th ledger line above the stave, and the octave above that. Half the section was marked _pp_ swelling to _p_ and then back again, while against that the other half were _p_ dropping to _pp_ and then _cresc_ back to _p_.
> Apart from the practicalities of playing such high harmonics at such low volumes, this notion of the octave pitches rising and falling against each other in volume, within such a narrow range; you could only hear it through headphones. We weren't the only instruments playing either. Daft.
> 
> If you want to write for orchestra, play in one! Learn what instruments can practically do, and practically not. Don't write the piccolo _ppp_ at the top of its range. Don't give a player two and a half beats to swap from oboe to cor anglais. Don't write notes that are out of range of the instrument. Yeah, I know Richard Strauss did it, but you're not Richard Strauss...
> 
> I reckon the computer is great for notation - especially if it can find the rests in the player's part and put them before the page-turn when printed out. But I'm not sure it's so good at truly conveying orchestral effects the way they will sound when played by people.
> cheers,
> G


Some good points here - but let's not blame the software for the shortcomings of the composer. The software doesn't try to emulate what can't be done - how can you emulate something that doesn't exist? The bottom line is "garbage in, garbage out!" Finale, and other similar programs, are a fantastic tool in the hands of someone who knows what he/she is doing. They also allow for the practically, and physically, impossible to be written and played back. How the software is used is up to the ability, knowledge, and education of the user. I suggest your organization needs to screen the students' pieces before excepting them and inflicting their impossibilities on the orchestra.

Ernie


----------



## Petwhac

Having written much for 'midi orchestra' using Logic Studio+ Vienna Special Edition + Garritan Personal Orchestra I am of the opinion that:
Realism is possible but it requires that the composer writes not for a real orchestra but for the software itself. In other words the limitless subtleties of orchestral writing are still ( maybe never will be) not served by software instruments but it is possible to give a very good representation if you tailor the music to the machine.
Here are are couple of vids.


----------



## GraemeG

Ernie said:


> The software doesn't try to emulate what can't be done - how can you emulate something that doesn't exist?....They also allow for the practically, and physically, impossible to be written and played back.


That looks like a contradiction to me...
Oh, we choose pieces carefully enough. It's just that sometimes you get the impression the composer thinks that because the computer can play something a certain way, it will sound that way in the orchestra. T'aint necessarily so...
cheers,
G


----------



## Ernie

GraemeG said:


> That looks like a contradiction to me...
> Oh, we choose pieces carefully enough. It's just that sometimes you get the impression the composer thinks that because the computer can play something a certain way, it will sound that way in the orchestra. T'aint necessarily so...
> cheers,
> G


That's my point, exactly. There's no contradiction - unless the composer is composing for the computer instead of for an orchestra. It is perhaps forgivable for a student to write "unplayable" music (music that can only be played back on the computer) but why should the orchestra waste its time trying to play it anyway? Unless, of course, you choose to make this a "teaching moment" by demonstrating to the student the "unplayability" of his/her music.

Cheers to you, too.
Ernie


----------



## chillowack

MrVoize said:


> MuseScore is a cool free midi/score manager that is similar to Finale. LMMS is another great freebie that is extremely powerful.
> 
> As for virtual instrument sounds, I've always had the best results just recording my own sample sets... very time consuming but worth it in the end.
> 
> As far as commercial packages go, nothing beats Kontakt. An extremely flexible tool that allows you to build your own instruments from scratch or take advantage of the huge library of pre packaged instruments (I think it now includes the Vienna symphonic library). One of these days if I have the $$$ I plan to purchase it myself.


Does Kontakt allow you to compose the music digitally, as with Finale and Sibelius?

Or do you play the notes through a MIDI controller, and Kontakt makes them sound more real?


----------



## chillowack

GraemeG said:


> Disclaimer: not a composer, not a software guru. Am a violinist...
> I wonder whether these programmes attempt to emulate what can't really be done.
> Here's the fr'instance. The orchestra I play in has a 'young composers workshop' we run once a year. Three young composers are chosen to have orchestral pieces - up to 10-15 mins worth of music - workshopped over about 3 3-hours sessions. They're all students, and so the parts arrive all nicely computer-generated - this is a great step forward!
> But as to the music itself; some of the 'effects' strike me as things you might possibly hear through headphones listening to your software, but stand no chance in the real world. This year, one piece concluded with the first violins (my section) playing _divisi_ the following: repeated bar-long Octave Gs, both harmonics, the notes being the 4th ledger line above the stave, and the octave above that. Half the section was marked _pp_ swelling to _p_ and then back again, while against that the other half were _p_ dropping to _pp_ and then _cresc_ back to _p_.
> Apart from the practicalities of playing such high harmonics at such low volumes, this notion of the octave pitches rising and falling against each other in volume, within such a narrow range; you could only hear it through headphones. We weren't the only instruments playing either. Daft.
> 
> If you want to write for orchestra, play in one! Learn what instruments can practically do, and practically not. Don't write the piccolo _ppp_ at the top of its range. Don't give a player two and a half beats to swap from oboe to cor anglais. Don't write notes that are out of range of the instrument. Yeah, I know Richard Strauss did it, but you're not Richard Strauss...
> 
> I reckon the computer is great for notation - especially if it can find the rests in the player's part and put them before the page-turn when printed out. But I'm not sure it's so good at truly conveying orchestral effects the way they will sound when played by people.
> cheers,
> G


Thanks for weighing in, Graeme. You make some good points, which all computer composers should bear in mind.


----------



## chillowack

Petwhac said:


> Having written much for 'midi orchestra' using Logic Studio+ Vienna Special Edition + Garritan Personal Orchestra I am of the opinion that:
> Realism is possible but it requires that the composer writes not for a real orchestra but for the software itself. In other words the limitless subtleties of orchestral writing are still ( maybe never will be) not served by software instruments but it is possible to give a very good representation if you tailor the music to the machine.
> Here are are couple of vids.


Petwhac, are these your compositions?

They're excellent!


----------



## Ernie

Petwhac said:


> Having written much for 'midi orchestra' using Logic Studio+ Vienna Special Edition + Garritan Personal Orchestra I am of the opinion that:
> Realism is possible but it requires that the composer writes not for a real orchestra but for the software itself. In other words the limitless subtleties of orchestral writing are still ( maybe never will be) not served by software instruments but it is possible to give a very good representation if you tailor the music to the machine.
> Here are are couple of vids.


I totally agree. Both of these compositions are excellent and the "orchestration" is quite convincing.

Ernie


----------



## Petwhac

Ernie said:


> I totally agree. Both of these compositions are excellent and the "orchestration" is quite convincing.
> 
> Ernie


Thanks!
The frustrating thing is that it takes longer to endlessly tweak the parts trying to make things sound realistic than it does to write the stuff. Much quicker to get an orchestra in a studio but ever so slightly more expensive!


----------



## Petwhac

chillowack said:


> Petwhac, are these your compositions?
> 
> They're excellent!


Yes and thanks


----------



## chee_zee

Vienna Symphonic Library is where it's at (vienna instruments pro and ensemble). It really cuts down the amount of time spent......programming shall we say. Very expensive (12480 USD), but you can just about write as if for real orchestra and it'll come out sounding very convincing. A few tweaks here and there and voila. With older stuff (even the older VSL Horizon series), however long it took to 'write' a piece, it'd take 2x that amount of time to 'program' and tweak it to sound real. Hell, you had to do separate staves for different articulations as well (though cubase came out with the 'vst expression' system not too long ago).


Sibelius 6 works perfectly with Vienna Ensemble, you hardly need a sequencer anymore, if at all (cubase, nuendo, logic, reaper, fl studio, etc). Obviously, it's out of price range for many people, unless you compose a LOT of music it won't be worth it because it will really be cheaper to hire an orchestra on a case by case basis. Why spend 12480 dollars if you write 4 or 5 pieces a year? You could've spent nearly half that hiring the local community orchestra.

And, in the end, for the most top notch projects......such as triple A video games (God of War, Call of Duty, Final Fantasy), blockbuster films etc.......they use real orchestras. The samples are only used as a screening, the composer writes out the song, has someone program it for samples (maybe do it themselves since VSL is so easy to use nowadays), and submits that to the music director of the project. And if the director likes it, it gets put on the cue list for recording with the hired orchestra.

Lesser games and tv shows will stick with soundfonts and samples because it's so serialized it really ends up being cheaper and quicker to use the sample libraries instead. We're talking hundreds of cues per year here after all, most less than 30 seconds long. What a hassle it'd be to record 5 second tv cues every week!


----------



## MrVoize

chillowack said:


> Does Kontakt allow you to compose the music digitally, as with Finale and Sibelius?
> 
> Or do you play the notes through a MIDI controller, and Kontakt makes them sound more real?


As I understand it, Kontakt is mostly a sample manager that you will still need some sort of midi composition to actually compose pieces. A few free midi composing tools support vst instrument plug ins.

I highly recommend Kontakt if you are building your own virtual instruments. Even if you do not want to build your own, the sample sets that are packaged with Kontakt are amazingly realistic and flexible. Compared to some of the other sample sets out there, the Komplete package is quite affordable.


----------



## vamos

aha. i was going to just mention kontakt. i do mostly piano stuff, it really is great.

my opinion is yeah, you're going to want it to be preformed eventually by human beings, for the best sound (most likely - unless you're doing something "strange" - noah chreshevsky)

but i've found that its very irritating to be composing while you listen to this **** version of your piece playing over and over. the music can be there but the representation of it by the vst you're using might ruin it.



kontakt helps a bit with this - not to mention its a great tool for all kinds of music making.


----------



## rohan

more than composer are making computer compositions sound in industry .


----------



## KPL

Just to add my 2p....
I use Sibelius - but the same technique can apply to any of the software nottion packages.
The computer is connected to a Roland 8850 Sound Canvas - which is a box (rather old now but still good) that converts the midi message into more realistic musical instrument sounds. As I compose, I listen to the results through my earphones.
When the Work is completed, I normally record what I am hearing from the box and create an MP3 file rather than a midi.

HOWEVER, the difference betwen listening to the piece on speakers rather than through ear/headphones - is the difference between potatoe soup and clear water! The detail of the orchestrationcan ONLY be heard if the music is piped directly into the ear!!

If you have a moment to listen to some of one of my pieces - streamed from my website. 
http://www.musicvenue21.com/pianoconcerto21stcenturysymphonicvenue.htm

Despite this caveat - you may agree that this is not a bad orchestral interpretation.....
KPL


----------



## teknoaxe

This is really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really late....

But 
Kontakt,
VSampler with Soundfonts, 
EastWestGold,

There are many plugins you can use to make very realistic sounding orchestras. Of course you need the musical production program too, which you compose with and provide you with additional effects to make the plugins seem like their in a hall or recording studio.

The other thing is that you need to pan your instruments to their correct position that they would be in a real orchestra. It'll keep the instruments from stepping on each other too.


----------



## KPL

Totally agree with teknoaxe here..... the setting of the position of the instruments in your orchestra is essential to the overall effect of the sound - just as it would be in a live concert setting.....
KPL
musicvenue21.com


----------

