How Does Each Film Composer Write (Paper or Software)?

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Pen and paper writing requirs more imagination though, doesnt it?

[Dixon Hill 4,233]

I wouldn't say so. You need imagination whether what follows is the writing of what you've imagined on paper, the entering of it into a notation program, or the playing of it into a sequencer.  Not to be undervalued, also, is the freedom that sequencers and recorders bring into the mix by capturing improvisation, the most direct and intuitive way into the imagination. Note that even JW has mics set up next to his piano.

[Naïve Old Fart 9,506]

Using computers in composing, is like using Pro Tools in recording: it diminishes the imagination, and makes the "composer" lazy. Nobody needs that sort of "intuition".

Anyway, what's music going to sound like, when people move on from computers?

[Sharkissimo 1,973]

6 hours ago, Richard said:

Using computers in composing, is like using Pro Tools in recording:

 

Agreed. Cubase is so much more intuitive.

[Dixon Hill 4,233]

On 10/22/2016 at 3:00 AM, Richard said:

Using computers in composing, is like using Pro Tools in recording: it diminishes the imagination, and makes the "composer" lazy. Nobody needs that sort of "intuition".

Anyway, what's music going to sound like, when people move on from computers?

 

What does this even mean?  You're becoming increasingly incoherent and uninformed in your posting, friendo.  Maybe don't try to argue for its own sake or to appear "old school?"

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

11 hours ago, Richard said:

Using computers in composing, is like using Pro Tools in recording: it diminishes the imagination, and makes the "composer" lazy. Nobody needs that sort of "intuition".

Anyway, what's music going to sound like, when people move on from computers?

 

Yes!

 

Technology is a direct enemy of human creativity!

[karelm 2,903]

Personally, I prefer old school hammer and chisel rather than paper and pencil.  I find paper and pencil too lazy.

[Dixon Hill 4,233]

Tools are inhibiting.  I only pass my compositions on through oral tradition. 

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Pervert!

[Richard Penna 3,674]

15 hours ago, Richard said:

Using computers in composing, is like using Pro Tools in recording: it diminishes the imagination, and makes the "composer" lazy. Nobody needs that sort of "intuition".

 

How exactly does it do either of those?

[Loert 2,510]

I actually wish that I could write a note on a piece of paper, write "flutes + oboes" around it, and have it played and recorded by a professional orchestra. Because using DAWs is so time consuming. You have to play in flute 1, flute 2, oboe 1 and oboe 2, make sure they're each set on the correct volume, have the right modulation (loudness), have the right reverb and ultimately have the right stereo placing.

 

Today I was finishing off a big action cue, and here's an example of what tracks had musical material in them in one of the measures :

 

Piccolo staccato

Flute 1 staccato

Flute 2 trill

Oboe 1 staccato

Oboe 2 staccato

Eb clarinet staccato

Clarinet 1 staccato

Cor anglais legato

Bassoon 1 & 2 staccato (actually just on the bassoon 1 track but I couldn't be arsed to play the upper and lower notes of a dyad into two seperate tracks!)

Contrabassoon staccato

 

Horn legato

Horn marcato

Horn marcato (three tracks used to create a sound of ~ 10 horns on a single melodic line, which I played into each track separately)

Trumpet legato

Trombone 1 legato

Trombone 2 staccato

Tuba legato

 

Piano

 

Timpani hits

Bass drum hits

Tom hits

Tamtam

Cymbal

Triangle

 

Violin 1 trill

Violin 1 trill (both tracks used to create a divisi octave trill)

Violin 2 legato

Viola staccato

Viola sustained with accent (because some of the notes in the staccato track had to sound "joined" to the next notes, like "Ba ba baaarum ba baaarum ba....")

Cello spiccato

Cello spiccato (double tracks to make it a little louder)

Cello sustained with accent (ba ba baaarum ba baaarum ba....)

Double bass tremolo

 

That's 33 tracks - 33 times I have to play in a couple of seconds of notes, to produce a couple of seconds of orchestral music. 33 times I need to set the modulation for each track. 33 times I need to hit record, quickly turn around to my piano, play in the notes musically and without a mistake, then turn back to press stop!

 

This is all very time consuming. It takes me around 40 minutes to produce one bar of music. For this track that amounted to about 4 hours of work for 25-30 seconds of music, after which I am well and truly exhausted.  And even then it doesn't typically sound realistic. And that doesn't include the time it takes to compose the stuff in the first place!

 

As for quieter cues, they typically have less tracks, but that comes with its own problems, because each track is much more audible, so that you have to take greater care to make each sound more realistic. In fact, I find it impossible to be satisfied enough with the quality, and whereas action tracks are very time-consuming, quieter tracks are more torturous when it comes to the mixing itself. 

 

So, in a way, I envy composers like John Williams who are able to just write some notes on some staves, knowing that it will all be performed by a professional orchestra (well, at least Williams conducts his own material in most cases, so he still works a bit on the performance side!). Yes, a clear advantage with computers is that you can instantly playback what you've written. But there was once a case, when I was writing an orchestral piece in Finale, where I actually had to mute the audio because the instruments sounded so shit that they were interfering with what I was conceiving in my head! So it is not always as good as it seems. However, on the other hand, an advantage with pen and paper is that, not only does it take less time to actually write out all the music, but you can immediately see the music you've written already. In Cubase, I can't see the notes I've entered beforehand, unless I select a particular track. And, if the music is complicated, it can be very hard to decipher what you've actually written, because it looks like this. As for not hearing what you've composed already with pen and paper, I honestly do most of my composing at the piano (or is the piano not allowed as well?) So I can play through the composition at the piano, to understand the purely musical/"note-y" side. I only use Cubase to actually play the notes in, to make my music exportable and listenable, because there is no other way for me to do that. I don't have access to an orchestra. The best I can do with is sample libraries and a computer.

 

So, the next time somebody says that computers make a composer's life "easier", like all they have to do is press a button and out pops the music, or something...I can assure that is not the case. I work really hard just to produce a few seconds of orchestral music, let alone compose it. Yes, there are those who will load "Strings staccato", "Brass" and "drums" and write music with three tracks, but you can usually tell when a composer does that. Yes, there are also some sample libraries that will "fake" the composition process in some way. They have their place and it's up to the person if they want to use them or not. But again, you can usually tell when they do. For me, I like to have the most degrees of freedom, because that's when you get the most musical results. And having those degrees of freedom costs a lot of time, though it's always worth it in the end. (well, not always...)

[Dixon Hill 4,233]

On 10/22/2016 at 7:18 PM, loert said:

So, the next time somebody says that computers make a composer's life "easier", like all they have to do is press a button and out pops the music, or something...I can assure that is not the case.

 

Well, I can't really agree with this.  

 

What you're describing is simply the price of using these wonderful new tools which enable composers to do exactly what you're doing, display their abilities on their own terms without needing to rely on a musician or musicians to champion their work, or to demonstrate material during the process of making a film or video game or what have you.  Or, on low budget productions, to provide a virtual score without real players.  Like anything else with music, this part of the process takes time.  It takes even more time, and can be frustrating, if you write on paper first, and then have to perform the music in, as you describe.  Even writing in a notation program has similar annoyances, since importing score data into a sequencer still leaves you with zero expression or articulation changes, etc.  That's how I do it, handwritten sketches, then a virtual performance.  It's a big time investment, but it's just part of it.  Set a core template up once, and you no longer have to worry about balancing each instrument, setting reverb, positioning, all that.  Just add or subtract whatever is necessary as appropriate from project to project, but at least you're not starting from nothing every time.  And also, make keyswitched instruments.  It's better than having tons of articulations on separate tracks, unless there are egregious mixing needs between, say, a stupidly loud staccato patch and a legato one.  

 

But you know what?  I'll take this even farther.  Computers would make my life as a composer even easier if I could totally ditch the paper altogether.  I know people who work this way.  They plan their music out meticulously, mostly in their head, and then go into their sequencer, with their ensemble already set up perfectly, and they play in each part according to their plan, laying down the core foreground material as a foundation, then everything else happens.  And they're not writing anything down other than key thematic ideas in the planning phase.  The composing is happening in real time, sometimes with the first pass being kept - composition by improvisation.  Other times, things are redone, just as you might write something down and then erase it and rewrite it several times.  And no amount of complexity of writing nor of orchestration is lost in this.  The most fluid and intuitively composed music I hear regularly is a result of this process.  Afterwards, it's a simple matter of transcription, which gets easier by the day as the notational abilities of sequencers are improved, to create a score if one is needed for the real players.  Getting it down on paper is just an afterthought, as it should be.  Yeah, I wish I could do that.  But I can't balance like that, holding things in my head, working purely by sound and not worrying about the notational representation of what I'm doing.  I can't even keep simple chordal passages clear enough in my head to work out the right division of parts between the strings, for example.  I have to write that down and see it to play it.  Notation is, for me, something of a creative prison.  It reduces a medium of sound to graphical representation and the inner ear, neither of which will ever be as good as sound itself manipulated in real time.  I am fascinated by the people who are able to do this, who are one with the machine.  I'm trying to get better at it.

 

Here's an interesting question.  If some technology existed to directly channel the activity of one's brain, would some of you purists consider it a lazy shortcut to have this technology extract directly from your imagination the music that you've thought up?

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

So you wish to give up on musicians and pen and paper all together? You damn automaton!

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Thats just 10 years away!

[Dixon Hill 4,233]

Cosman sounds suspiciously like a name that a robot would use to blend in.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Blume?

[BloodBoal 7,538]

3 minutes ago, Prerecorded Briefing said:

Cosman sounds suspiciously like a name that a robot would use to blend in.

 

Yes! Burn him at the stake! Then we'll know what's behind all that pinky skin!

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

I am not a SPAMBOT!

[BloodBoal 7,538]

Exactly what a spambot would say! Get him, boys!

[Naïve Old Fart 9,506]

"When you employ a machine to do the work of a man, you take something away from the man".

 

There's no doubt that technology has made the Human race lazy, impatient, selfish, and intolerant. 

What will happen when computers reach the limits of their "assistance" with composing (or anything else)?

 What will replace that process, and what will be the repercussions?

[Dixon Hill 4,233]

Alarmist nonsense.  Good grief!

[BloodBoal 7,538]

Indeed!

 

The machines are our friends. They do all the things we don't want to do. There's no reason for them to turn against us!

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

You're a SPAMBOT!

[KK 3,307]

Of course he is! He's your successor after all.

[Will 2,215]

On 10/20/2016 at 9:00 PM, zaddini said:

I know that Gordy Haab (SW:Battlefront/SW:TOR/SW:Kinect/Halo Wars 2) uses pen and paper. He has dedicated team of mock-up artists that help him present his ideas to producers utilizing virtual instruments. He has mentioned it in several interviews.

 

Wow! That's pretty cool. I figured that for sure he'd just compose right on the computer. 

[justaguy 68]

https://8dio.com/2012/04/09/interview-with-austin-wintory/

 

Quote

How do you integrate samples into your work? I’m asking this in particular as I heard that you are more of a traditional pen and paper composer, like John Williams.

 

Austin Wintory: I wouldn’t liken myself to John Williams in that sense (or honestly, any other!). I sketch by hand but I always do mockups. It ends up being a hybrid of the two, and I like to orchestrate in a hybrid approach too. But my rig is certainly a core part of my approach. I am a bit more traditional in that I tend to formulate a musical idea first, then try and develop sounds or templates to achieve that, versus just loading up samples and playing around with them until I find something interesting. That approach can work too, but it’s usually not how my mind works.

 

[karelm 2,903]

On 10/22/2016 at 6:43 PM, Prerecorded Briefing said:

Here's an interesting question.  If some technology existed to directly channel the activity of one's brain, would some of you purists consider it a lazy shortcut to have this technology extract directly from your imagination the music that you've thought up?

 

I believe pruning is a big part of the process.  What you are describing is pretty much improvisation and the big difference between composing and improvisation is that improvisation is a performance where composition is not.  For me, my ideas are not complete they need to be refined and elaborated on through the course of time so I do not think a brain transcription technology would help much.  I do think it would be the equivalent of recording my thematic ideas when there is no other way to capture a fleeting theme. 

[Loert 2,510]

7 hours ago, zaddini said:

https://8dio.com/2012/04/09/interview-with-austin-wintory/

Quote

I am a bit more traditional in that I tend to formulate a musical idea first

 

 

Wait, this is "traditional" now??!!

 

3 hours ago, karelm said:

I believe pruning is a big part of the process.  What you are describing is pretty much improvisation and the big difference between composing and improvisation is that improvisation is a performance where composition is not.  For me, my ideas are not complete they need to be refined and elaborated on through the course of time so I do not think a brain transcription technology would help much.  I do think it would be the equivalent of recording my thematic ideas when there is no other way to capture a fleeting theme. 

 

Indeed. I wouldn't be able to produce an entire composition like that, but it might be useful for "projecting" a few notes at a time. Even then, there is likely to be "noise", whereas transcribing manually involves some degree of self-examination in the process.

[Sharkissimo 1,973]

10 minutes ago, loert said:

Wait, this is "traditional" now??!!

 

Concerning if that's true.

[KK 3,307]

21 minutes ago, loert said:

 

Wait, this is "traditional" now??!!

 

 

Indeed. I wouldn't be able to produce an entire composition like that, but it might be useful for "projecting" a few notes at a time. Even then, there is likely to be "noise", whereas transcribing manually involves some degree of self-examination in the process.

 

This. One of the main advantages of pencil and paper (or digital transcription). You get to properly evaluate the work as whole and what exactly trying to do. Working of just the DAW can make it more difficult to be more critical of the bigger picture of the work. It's a valid method, but easier to get sloppy.

[Dixon Hill 4,233]

I haven't found that to be the case. Seems like people who work that way are far more critical of what they're doing since they're hearing it immediately, and things get changed. It's easier to fudge things on paper.

[dizogi 0]

On 9/26/2016 at 3:58 AM, Will said:

I was wondering recently which film composers use/used pen/pencil and paper and which use/used computer software. For example, Horner. Or Desplat (I know he uses the VSL but does he sometimes use paper)? Giacchino (obviously he uses MIDI sometimes, but always?) Etc.

Hello ! I believe that a well-trained musician should not have problems with technology changes. Every good musician should have writing compositions on paper and should be able to write compositions with the help of electronics! This is a development! The authors wrote texts on paper earlier. Authors write texts in Word now. College paper writing service papersowl.com can help authors with writing papers in Word! I believe that the development of technology is a good process. Therefore, authors of texts need to learn how to use the Word, and composers should learn to use electronics!

[Fabulin 3,510]

.

 

[Marcus 390]

I'm currently scoring a fairly big feature film, requiring 110-120 minutes of orchestral music, some of it highly complex.

 

I do all of my work in very detailed short-score with no additional orchestrators, sending each page off to only two people: An engraver providing orchestral parts, and an assistant providing mock-ups (and digital elements integral to the score, all of which I first notate and describe to the best of my ability).

 

It's a small team, but a very effective one. 

 

For my concert work, it's all manuscript, but most of it gets engraved courtesy of my publisher.

[Dixon Hill 4,233]

1 hour ago, Marcus said:

An engraver providing orchestral parts, and an assistant providing mock-ups (and digital elements integral to the score, all of which I first notate and describe to the best of my ability).

 

This is what I do too now.  It was fun to play with the gear for a while but unless you can really make it part of your process it's better to outsource that part of the work to those who can.  I'm just a few years too old to have the right stuff for the new approach.

[Bayesian 1,359]

I don’t write music and can’t offer an informed opinion on this topic. But I think that being able to write music with paper and pen would make a composer more agile than solely using computer tech. You can take p&p wherever you go and can input with much greater freedom (eg, you could notate calligraphically at one extreme or write chicken-scratching indecipherable to no one but you at the other). With computers, you typically must input in only the manner designed or allowed by the device or program. That would inherently have to be more restricting than p&p. Plus, writing with p&p seems more elegant in its simplicity—it’s only two tangible items, either of which could be substituted readily (no paper? Grab a napkin. Or cardboard. Or birch bark. No pen? How about pencil, chalk, paint, lipstick?...) With tech, the necessary items are remarkably more complex. You need an input device, a processor/computer, software, memory & storage, a workstation to set it up on, electricity to run it, etc. No matter how much tech aids the process, there’s no arguing that tech makes for a simple solution like p&p does. 

 

Note that I’m not some Luddite. In a previous career, I did a lot of document design and map work as part of my job. I never did any of it in an analog mode (eg, cutting pieces of paper and assembling with tape, drafting at a drafting board). It was all digital, all ArcGIS and Adobe Creative Suite. I think my work stands up well, especially for an amateur, and most things I did would be impossible in a purely analog workflow. So tech wins out there.

 

 

[Jurassic Shark 12,033]

On ‎1‎/‎28‎/‎2019 at 7:44 PM, Marcus said:

I'm currently scoring a fairly big feature film, requiring 110-120 minutes of orchestral music, some of it highly complex.

 

I do all of my work in very detailed short-score with no additional orchestrators, sending each page off to only two people: An engraver providing orchestral parts, and an assistant providing mock-ups (and digital elements integral to the score, all of which I first notate and describe to the best of my ability).

 

It's a small team, but a very effective one. 

 

For my concert work, it's all manuscript, but most of it gets engraved courtesy of my publisher.

 

Which SW do you do the short-score in?

[Marcus 390]

Only manuscript.

8 staves for smaller cues, up to 20 for the busiest ones:

[Jurassic Shark 12,033]

2 minutes ago, Marcus said:

Only manuscript.

8 staves for smaller cues, up to 20 for the busiest ones:

 

Oh, I thought JW was the only film composer still doing that.

[kylemurray 4]

Tip from the press a year ago. One of the famous composers admitted: “On large projects, we work as a team and try to use the widest possible musical palette: a live symphony orchestra, analog, and digital synthesizers, an entire array of drums and percussions (from orchestral to electronic), vocals, sound design elements... Therefore, we work in four different DAW.

 

1. Cubase is the undisputed market leader for current music programming. Somewhere about 80% of the source material is implemented in it.

 

2. Samplitude is my personal workhorse and my “mother tongue”. Not as advanced in terms of programming as Cubase, but it also tries and develops. Among the shortcomings: Samplitude is not on Mac OS.

 

3. Ableton Live is suitable for "fashionable winding" material. All the same can be done in any other DAW, but Ableton does it faster.

 

4. Pro Tools - the most powerful industrial tool with the best math mix, which is our “end station”. Gradually, all the music created is assembled into a single Pro Tools project, in which recorded tracks coexist: sketches of orchestral tracks. They are then replaced by the recording of a live orchestra (the orchestral sessions we prepare and record in the same project), tracks of synthesizers, drums, vocals, and other solo instruments. Mixing music, we also produce here.

 

On TV shows, if the budget does not allow an orchestra to be recorded, and music is only needed in stereo, we are using Cubase and Samplitude.

 

For me, as a student at Antioch University Seattle, it was very interesting to collect complete information about computer music software, but there was no time. Our professor gave us a written assignment to reveal the topic of computer music. Some students got the result of the process - groups using computer music. I chose the beginning of the process - creation, creativity, the sacrament of music for a term paper, and found it on au.papersowl.com. Here is the result:

 

Computer programs for musicians

 

Regardless of what exactly connects you with the music - whether you are a sound engineer, composer, musician or arranger - music software, or music "software", you simply need. With the help of modern computer programs, you can easily translate your ideas and perform current tasks more efficiently.

 

MakeMusic Finale

Being one of the most popular music editors, Finale is actually a veteran of music software - the first version of the program was released in 1988. The finale is widely used by professional publishers and composers. This has already become a standard in the music industry. Even the hits of box-office films such as Spider-Man 2 were compiled using this editor. There are several ways to work with the program: using the keyboard and mouse or, more conveniently, using a MIDI keyboard. Finale supports importing and exporting MIDI files, allowing you to export audio files in .wav, .mp3, and .aif formats. There are several versions of the program - from basic to advanced. Price varies accordingly.

 

Sibelius

Another famous music editor, used by both professional composers and amateurs. In Sibelius, a very intuitive interface - you can perform almost any operation without much going into the menu. The menu itself is well structured. One of the undoubted advantages of the program is the possibility of arranging notes of any complexity. Sibelius allows you to play files and also performs audio recording. At the same time, the sound range is not limited to the “factory” collection; you can use any of the sound libraries on your computer. Of course, MIDI is fully supported. Another convenient option is the ability to publish notes online so that other users have free access to them. Sibelius also took care of the release of more affordable versions.

 

MuseScore

Free and, according to many, the best alternative to the above programs. MuseScore also has a wide range of capabilities, including printing, import/export of notes, support for MIDI keyboard. It even supports a musical score for percussion instruments, which in itself is quite rare, especially for a free program. The interface is very intuitive, which simplifies editing. There is an opportunity to work with 4 voices on any number of musical staffs - their number is not limited. Files are exported in .wav, .ogg, and .flac formats or are played using the integrated synthesizer. MuseScore is translated into 35 languages and can be installed on Windows, Mac OS, and Linux platforms.

 

GVOX Encore

And one more powerful, but at the same time easy to use software for working with notes, from the company GVOX. Encore allows musicians of any level to arrange, edit and arrange notes of up to 64 musical staffs and 8 voices per mill. Fully supports MIDI, including additional options such as playing dynamics, repetitions, pedal accents and endings. Encore is famous for its customizable toolbar, which makes composing, arranging, editing, transposing and printing notes simply, even for schoolchildren. With its extensive capabilities, this software is suitable for creating simple sheet music solos, as well as for composing entire symphonies. Works on Mac and Windows platforms; moreover, the files are interchangeable.

 

AUDIO EDITORS

 

Adobe Audition

Adobe is known as the market leader in publishing software and graphic design for music. Considering the size of their budget, Adobe could purchase almost any company and its products - as happened in the case of Cool Edit Pro, which was transformed into a multifunctional digital sound station called Audition. Audition has a special interface that allows simultaneous editing of multiple tracks. VST plug-ins (instruments and effects) are supported, as well as ReWire technology. The program works on both Windows and Mac OS X.

 

Steinberg Cubase

Cubase is a digital audio station developed by Steinberg, the company that launched the ASIO and VST protocols on the market, which are widely used in audio software today. A notable feature of the latest version of Cubase is an advanced synthesizer, drum set and the ability to stretch audio in real time, as well as adjust its tempo. The so-called "control point" facilitates the process of mixing audio. The program fully supports Windows 7, both 32 and 64-bit system. Also available for Mac OS X.

 

Audacity

Audacity - multi-track audio recording software - is one of the best editors on the market. It allows you to record, mix, edit audio files on 16 separate channels. The program works with the formats WAV, MP3, AIFF, and OGG. Among the advanced options is the ability to adjust the tempo and tone of the audio. Cassettes and old recordings can be converted to digital format, and at the same time, Audacity will save you time by breaking the original audio into tracks. There are many effects that can be applied to audio. The program is available in over 20 languages for Windows, Linux and Mac OS X platforms.

 

Cakewalk Sonar

Sonar is a digital sound station (DAW) developed by Cakewalk / Roland and released last in the company's long list of products. It was created for recording, mixing, editing and publishing audio. The program supports files in .avi, .mpeg, .mov, .wmv, as well as various options for exporting audio, including 64-bit MASTERS. This software is based on the ACT (Active Controller Technology) technology, which expands the ability to manage effects and virtual instruments, and also allows you to work with surround audio with an unlimited number of tracks. However, Mac users are likely to be disappointed - Sonar only works on the Windows platform.

 

VIRTUAL TOOLS

Native Instruments Kore

Native Instruments is one of the leading manufacturers of music software. Kore 2 is a unique music creation tool with a library of over 500 sounds. The parameters of each sound can be edited, and it is also possible to combine them and apply different effects, thus creating completely unique sounds. Kore Player is a free version of the program, however, it is very powerful. It has a library of 150 sounds that can be used for music of any genre - ambient, classical, techno, etc. The instruments include piano, organs, drums, and, in fact, everything that an arranger might need. With this choice, Kore Player should be the starting point in the world of virtual instruments. It is even surprising that the standard package of some models of MIDI keyboard includes a CD with the program.

 

Modartt Pianoteq

It was always hard to find a good virtual piano, but with the release of the first version of Pianoteq, the situation has changed. As a simplified alternative to sound libraries, Pianoteq is physically modeled and based on a new generation of real sound technology. This program is remarkable not only because of the realistic piano, but also the harpsichord, vibraphone and other instruments - you can even create your own. The product is very dynamic and can be customized for each individual. Many famous composers, pianists, arrangers, and songwriters use Pianoteq. If you are a professional musician and need a real piano - this program is for you. Pianoteq is compatible with Windows, Mac OS X, and Linux.

 

SONiVOX Symphonic Ensemble Strings

To get the sound of a symphonic ensemble, you will need either the ensemble itself or its imitation. However, many virtual instruments sound monotonous and artificial rather than symphonic. In this regard, the software from SONiVOX stands out significantly, and to be sure of this, you can listen to the audio sample on the official website. The string section consists of basses, cellos, violas, first and second violins - each instrument is carefully recorded in accordance with its position in the orchestra. The program Symphonic Ensemble Strings works as a plugin, and as a standalone application; compatible with Windows, Mac OS.

 

Garritan

The Garritan company creates its products based on surprisingly "democratic" technologies: Personal Orchestra, Concert and Marching Band, World Instruments, Jazz & Big Band, Steinway Piano. Garritan product developers are positioning their software as unique and affordable, with a particular focus on educational goals. The product “Authorized Steinway Virtual Concert Grand” deserves special attention for those who want to purchase a virtual piano. The program was developed in collaboration with and supervised by Steinway & Sons - the best pianos manufacturers in the world. Their legendary Steinway Model D concert grand piano was manually selected as the backbone of the digital product, including for audio recording. Two versions were created - basic and professional, the latter has five different views of the listener (from the performer, from the stage, from under the instrument cover, etc.). Working on the ARIA Instrument mechanism, the Authorized Steinway virtual piano is available for all major platforms.

 

FORTE http://www.fortenotation.com/ The application is designed both for professional musicians, arrangers, composers, music educators, and for beginners, for example, for students of children's music schools who are only taking their first steps in the world of music. To do this, several versions of FORTE have been implemented, including a free basic program for getting to know and working with basic functions. The program allows you to record, edit, process and print sheet music. Even the basic version offers more than 100 tools to choose from. The application interface is made in English, but is very intuitive, since it was developed with the active participation of the musicians themselves.

 

https://theproaudiofiles.com/hexachords-orb-composer-review/ Orb Composer helps you compose music using artificial intelligence

A virtual studio assistant offers ideas for arrangements based on the composer's actions. Hexachords note that Orb Composer does not replace the composer and does not write music for a person. The main task of artificial intelligence is to create drafts and demos of songs, relying solely on the musical ideas of a person. Studying the actions of the user and his decisions, the program offers options for the development of the composition, new participants of the arrangement, chord sequences, instrument parts and much more.

 

https://www.theverge.com/2019/3/27/18283084/warner-music-algorithm-signed-ambient-music-endel

 

For the first time in history, Warner Music Corporation has signed a contract with an automatic music generator. The German program Endel itself creates unique compositions using a combination of the sounds of nature. At the same time, the application analyzes the time of year, the interests of the user and other parameters in order to make tracks that consumers will definitely like. How such programs can change the music industry in the near future, leading futurologists of the world are beginning to argue. ”

 

I think that the main thing in music does not change - the creativity of the composer, the creativity of the demiurge!

 

P.S. According to experts, the further transformation of the music and show business market will take place at an accelerated pace. As you know, in China and Korea, concerts of fully virtual performers are already common, and the number of fans of “digital” idols is estimated at millions. Now this trend, the analyst believes, will spread to a more conservative western market.

P.P.S.  AI music - link to Utube. Everyone can listen and choose something special for themselves. It is alive or dead - time will tell. But all this will never replace the works of brilliant composers in the concert hall ...

[Disco Stu 15,495]

I'm listening

[kylemurray 4]

„Simplicity is the final achievement. After one has played a vast quantity of notes and more notes, it is the simplicity that emerges as the crowning reward of art.“

 Frédéric Chopin

 

[Disco Stu 15,495]

Go on

[Oomoog the Ecstatic 314]

I compose music only in Excel.

[Jurassic Shark 12,033]

I was suspecting that.

[Lord Zimmer 211]

Have to ask Lorne and Benjamin.

[Jurassic Shark 12,033]

[kylemurray 4]

On 4/26/2019 at 1:21 PM, Jurassic Shark said:

I can't not share impressions, emotions for more than two weeks run wild in me.

The San Diego Symphony concert on Friday, April 12 felt slow and controversial. I was surprised. In years gone by, the combination of conductor Jahja Ling, the San Diego Symphony, and Johannes Brahms, has been unpredictable. But on Friday Weber and conductor Jahja Ling are really a wonderful combination. Der Freischütz - the music is good enough and reflects the story of the development of young love and agreement with the devil. But the overall impression of what I heard was different. My big discovery in Chopin's Concerto for Piano and Orchestra was the performance of Jan Lisiecki. His piano playing inspired me so much that I completely forgot about the bad mood from the previous performance. Jan Lisiecki played her amazingly. It even exceeded all my expectations. About Brahms Symphony number 4, I just keep silence.
This is a vivid example of the fact that it doesn’t matter at all what tools the composer uses, an Excel, a special music software, a Word, a ballpoint pen or a quill pen. The measure of everything is the talent of the composer. That's why I love John Williams. After all, he gives every musical phrase a soul. That's what we love him for.

[Jurassic Shark 12,033]

24 minutes ago, kylemurray said:

Excel

 

25 minutes ago, kylemurray said:

Word

 

Geez Kyle, those were jokes!