New review of Philharmonik

[Sequent]

Interesting review here by Peter Alexander. It's a good one... so no worries.

http://soniccontrol.com/reviews/details.php?ID=103

[Caleb]

Nice review.

Regards
Caleb

[telebunke]

From the review:

Solo Strings. Well, I'd certainly like to see the MIDI file of the demo on the IK site for Presto, from Bach's Sonata for Violin n.1 in G-minor because that's one amazing demo. Overall, I feel that the solo strings are very useful and have a great sound. But, I really want to see that MIDI file.

I'd like to see that MIDI file, too.
These things are very good for studies of how to do it.

tele

[stayne]

I recently acquired Miroslav through a trade and it is indeed warmer and richer than any library I've ever heard. I haven't updated to 1.1 yet as I heard here's still a few issues to iron out so alas, I'm dongled.

[Kim Lajoie]

I just want to point out that contrary to the review, the samples in Miroslav Philharmonik are stereo. There are mono versions of some of the instruments included as well.

That's just a minor niggle though. Good to see this reviewer "gets it". It's about the sound. We love Miroslav Vitous because of his sound.

-Kim.

[telebunke]

Kim/Squids: I like this part of the review - it would be great if SR came up with something.

There's sauce, and there's the goose. The library is the goose, and it's mighty tasty. But for me, being on a tight writing schedule, the programming/editing elements have to be the sauce. I propose this New Year's Resolution: 10 meaningful tutorials for composers before Frankfurt.

tele

[DevonB]

That's just a minor niggle though. Good to see this reviewer "gets it". It's about the sound. We love Miroslav Vitous because of his sound.

-Kim.

So only people who like the library "get it?" Miro certainly is about the sound, absolutely. It be nice if it was possbile to update to be more on par with more recent library capabilities though. I was hoping that was going to happen with having access to all the original samples, and was something I had been meaning to ask Dave about if it was even possible? Dave?

Devon

[Kim Lajoie]

Well, it's certainly possible to "get it" without actually liking the library. Maybe if you need those 300 gigabytes of 300 articulations with 300 velocity layers with artificial intelligence legato sample switching and a dedicated computer to run it. If that's you I understand if you're not so excited about Philharmonik.

-Kim.

[stayne]

I am by no means an accomplished composer, but I threw this little passage together to show off the strings. I am quite sure they could be shown off 100 times better. It's just a one-take short clip with no direction. I'm loving it more every day. This particular patch is velocity sensitive and the brass fires off once in a while where it shouldn't. Oh well, I'll work on something decent over this yummy 4 day weekend. No work = work .

www.strafed.net/audio/mp1.mp3

[stayne]

Mozart - Concerto in D for Trumpet and Strings (Adagio). I think it's a bit too bright though...I should ease off on the sparkle . This is a midi file, not mine, imported into eXT and ran through Philharmonik. Two channels were used (string section and solo trumpet) and a bit of convolution.

www.strafed.net/audio/mozart1.mp3

[spuddle]

Interesting review from the guy who is giving a free online orchestration class on the V.I control forums.

His workbook is here: www.professionalorchestration.com

[nexussynth]

a nice review but it contains several inaccuracies and not just about Miro.

also, the reviewer seems infatuated with his GIGA and that is a platform which is eventually going to follow the dinosaurs into oblivion, so it would not make sense for Ik or squids to put any effort into that (with all it's problems).

frankly, I think NI needs to study the Miro gui and completely re-work Kontakt. it gets more confusing with each update imo.

nice chamber strings are needed in the Miro, though. he's right.

also, the CSR 'verb built-in is fantastic imo. I have other great reverbs and don't ever use them with Miro. I am not that gassed about GIGA's impulse reverbs they sound bloated and hyper-realistic to my ears and I've spent a lot of time listening to real orchestras in rehersals and concerts.

I have EWQLSO Gold XP and still I come back to the Miro and usually start my pieces there and make substitutions with my other libs as needed.

I think alternating up and down bows would be terrific in Miro but I don't think Miroslav recorded any alternate bow strokes?

Miro actually needs very little. I don't use keyswitches (they always seem counter-intuitive to me). I think the reviewer is missing the point of the Miroslav Philharmonik but thats just my opinion

[PaulG]

Miro actually needs very little. I don't use keyswitches (they always seem counter-intuitive to me).

Hey, Nexus, (or anyone else, too!),

Would you possibly explain a little about your own workflow? I am having difficulty wrapping my head around the whole orchestral library/DAW/workflow thing - I come from the pop/rock-type world and it's not synching up with me how to get the various articulations of an instrument or group with as "little" tracks/steps, etc, as possible into the DAW.

I am working on studying orchestration but being primarily a guitar player is making me wonder actually how many of the various orchestral insruments articulations are actually usable in "real life" so to speak, as I know that there are some with the guitar that I don't ever use in my writing and probably won't ever, either.

This is tough, honestly, because when I bring up Miro - unless I am missing something obvious - some the articulations within instrument groups don't seem to be consistent, meaning that I noticed that, say, the Violas might have one articulation that the violins might not.

Again, it may be all me because I am in the process of learning what articulations actually matter from a composition and overall sound point of view, but noticing this actually turned me off from Miro up until I started reading posts here again and was going to turn to some of the other libraries that seemed to have at least "all the articulations from the orchestration books" and stuff like keyswitching, etc.

But then I read this and other MIRO posts that tend to imply that those things aren't really needed that much and it makes me look back at Miro again, but also wonder what I didn't know in the first place.

I totally know and admit that this is stupid thinking (if this were a guitar-oriented sampler I would have no issues at all) but I would think that anyone who has gotten their playing and writing chops on modern styles would suffer this dilemma, also.

It's tough to try to get all of the information that you need (when trying to learn at least enough to product decent quality work in a reasonable amount of time) when there is so much, um, "feature marketing" for lack of a better term. Oh, EW has this! Ooh, Vienna has that!

But at the end, it's just a tool to make music with, and being that I do have Miro I would like to use this tool to most productively.

I am extremely thankful to all who post or contribute here just due to the amount of time and frustration that is saved (sometimes hugely so) from learning about workflow and productivity whild still trying to grasp orchestration in general.

It might seem like a small thing to share something on this forum, but honestly it does make a huge contribution, so thank you all, again.

I hope that 2007 treats you all "lavish beyond reason".



- Paul

[DevonB]

This is tough, honestly, because when I bring up Miro - unless I am missing something obvious - some the articulations within instrument groups don't seem to be consistent, meaning that I noticed that, say, the Violas might have one articulation that the violins might not.

Again, it may be all me because I am in the process of learning what articulations actually matter from a composition and overall sound point of view, but noticing this actually turned me off from Miro up until I started reading posts here again and was going to turn to some of the other libraries that seemed to have at least "all the articulations from the orchestration books" and stuff like keyswitching, etc.

But then I read this and other MIRO posts that tend to imply that those things aren't really needed that much and it makes me look back at Miro again, but also wonder what I didn't know in the first place.

Articulations that aren't really needed? Do you need hammer-ons, pull-offs, pinch harmonics, and more for guitar in a sample library? If your composition doesn't use them, then you don't need them. If you use them, then obviously you need them. To me, the more options, the better. If you don't need anything beyond slow legato strings, who am I to say that not having spiccato on each string section is bad for you? If you find that that is the articulation you need for a piece though, you'll be cursing (I was actually quite happy to get larger libraries after my initial purchase of Miro back in the late 90's because certain artuclations were missing that I wanted.) Again, this comes back to no library is perfect, and there is no "best" library. If you need a particular trick that your pony doesn't perform, you'll probably need another pony.

Devon

[Jonny Quest]

[Articulations that aren't really needed? Do you need hammer-ons, pull-offs, pinch harmonics, and more for guitar in a sample library? If your composition doesn't use them, then you don't need them. If you use them, then obviously you need them. To me, the more options, the better. If you don't need anything beyond slow legato strings, who am I to say that not having spiccato on each string section is bad for you?

Even though it is not the typical object of praise...or criticism...the classical guitar sounds and instrument settings are fairly well done on Miro imo.

If anyone is interested, this is short piece I made using just Miro guitars. While not a stellar composition on my part, I think it demonstrates some of the nuances that can be brought out from this collection.

miro guitars

Peace,

Jonny