New review of Philharmonik

[Squids]

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

Well, only people that like it do GET IT (as in get it = they go buy it ).

As far as capabilities on par with other orchestral products it actually does some things such as the stretch programs that literally no other orchestral product has the capability of regardless of price. These can actually be used in a track for incredible flexibility and realism. In fact, I don't know if any of you guys have watched the videos I did on http://www.philharmonik.com in the download section but go check it out as I give a first hand demonstration of some of those proprietary features.

There is more Miroslav material than what we've released so far. So, there are more things to look forward to in the future. Is it going to all of a sudden have the same spec for spec with VSL and others like it? No, it's a different animal. But that was never the goal. The goal was simply to marry the beautiful sound that Miroslav capture with the technology and workstation/easy/fast working environment of SampleTank.

One thing that is interesting from a business standpoint is that despite Miroslav Philharmonik not matching up spec for spec with some other modern orchestral plug-ins, it is actually the best selling orchestral plug-in in the MI market and has been for a while. The second best seller is GPO. So, it seems like most people are thinking of the value for money "spec" more than anything else. That doesn't mean I don't personally drool over some of the stuff the VSL instruments do. I don't have them personally (although I have the library) but I think that stuff is really cool. I guess they must sell a lot direct to be able to continue. I don't see it much in the stores. But, I like what they're doing. It's cool stuff! I love to see innovative products like that. I love to make them when it is possible but in the case of Miroslav specifically we are also just working with what we have and making that come alive better than ever before.

I do have a symphonic surprise for NAMM though. Can't say yet what that is but it could make a few people happy! (no it is not my release of Star Wars done completely with Philharmonik haha)

[Squids]

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

There are more articulations in the archives that haven't been released. So there may be things like that. Just read this.

One of the things specifically that is cool about using Stretch and the articulations is that you can do things like take detache' and change the duration and shape of it in real time assigning Stretch tempo to a controller (which we did automatically in the Stretch patches... extra work to make things easy where it does this with the modwheel... lots of hidden gems in there like that). Another cool one is taking flutter or tremolo with stretch and being able to change the pitch without affecting the tempo. This is incredibly realistic and I haven't seen anything else do this well (or most don't do it at all because they don't have anything like Stretch... closest thing is the Tone Machine in Kontakt which doesn't do it as well).

But, I agree with you that when you are working on an orchestral piece and you need various nuances, articulations or heck even just different SOUNDS (more agressive,brighter, more mellow, more lush, more in your face etc.) then it is nice to pool from a variety of different orchestral products as you do and other pros do. It's like your big symphonic tool kit that you get to know so you know where to go for what.

For me personally, I do a lot of rock, pop, trip hop, electronic and film scoring type music where Philharmonik most of the time does the trick. But, I have several others like EWQL, VSL, SI and some misc things (not to mention SR stuff including things we've not released yet like a surround sound string section which sounds incredible btw... we'll release it one of these days) that I use whenever I need it. I am also lazy though so Philharmonik is my go to piece and if does the trick I am happy. Sometimes it just takes more time to work on the track itself, editing little things like attacks and timing, volume swells etc. to make it the part sound better rather than rely on just some fancy feature (you may even have to do MORE work to get to sound right sometimes).

[PaulG]

Well, Dave, here's my own dilemma, stemming from the fact (honestly) taht I just don't know orchestral instruments (yet)...

...when I load Miro and look at, say, ENS French Horns, and keep in mind this is just from my own ignorance, when I look at the patch list -

* French Horns 1
* French Horns FF
(...)

NOT being a French Horn player, I am immediately thinking, well, what happened to the "F" patch, is it even needed or IS that what the "1" patch is, and if NOT the latter, will it sound like too much of a timbre leap if I go from the "1" patch to the "FF" patch in one melody line for instance? I am not asking these as actual questions for you or the forum, but this is the thought process that, again, for reasons due to my own lack of familiarity with those French Horns, I can't help wondering if this isn't some form of significant limitation. Not saying there IS, just saying from a neophite orchestrator point of view, should I even bother going any furher?

The Ens Trombones show the same thing, while the Ens Trumpets don't seem to show any sort of "F" or "FF" patch at all. Not, you guessed it, being a trumpet player and thus knowing if those even matter, I am wondering of the limitations due the PERCEPTION of some patches/sounds that might(???) be missing.

These still aren't questions that I am asking you, but I wanted to be very open and honest about some of the thoughts that I might not be the only one thinking.

Maybe these questions go beyond the scope of libraries itself and down to orchestration, or maybe Miro himself just didn't include them, so obviously in your favor there ain't nothin' you can do if the library didn't include 'em in the first place.

I guess to sum up my overall dilemma with doing much at all with Miro is the perception something is missing due to the lack of consistency within instrument groups of patches with dynamics and/or specific articulations, and not being sure if it matters.

Still learning the whole orchestra-as-instrument doesn't do much to help, either. (Meaning that obviously with Miro's background, he must have known that articulatons/patches with certain dynamics levels are not really needed.)

And for the record, too, I am certainly more inteested by a long shot in workflow and productivity over being too crazy about every articulation in the book.

I am totally willing to be wrong in all things that I went over here. Do you have any thoughts/comments/ansers to help clear up at least this dilemma in perception?

Thank you, and sorry for making this so friggin' long.

- Paul

[Kim Lajoie]

One way of looking at it is: do you need those additional dynamics and articulations for your music? Ultimately, that's the only thing that matters. If Philharmonik provides what you need, then use it! Personally, I don't ever use tremolo strings at all, so if Philharmonik didn't have them (it does, by the way, and they're very good) it wouldn't bother me. On the other hand, I tend to use fast attack strings quite a lot, so I really enjoy having the different staccato, detache and fast legato articulations.

If you judge a library according to what is "theoretically" missing, then you'll always be disappointed, no matter which library you look at. An acoustic orchestra is a living, breathing ensemble and there will always be things you can ask it to do that a sample library cannot reproduce.

If you're not really sure what you need and what you don't, the best thing to do is just start using it. If you need something different to compliment Philharmonik, you'll find yourself saying "Hmm, I wish Philharmonik had this", or "Hmm, I seem to be missing that".

-Kim.

[Squids]

Good to hear your perspective Paul. Thanks. We tried to stay true to how Miroslav himself named the samples (with us adding mostly just the suffixes relating to the programming part). If he called it FF then we did, if he called it "1, 2" then we did. This also kept it somewhat familiar to people who owned the original as well... although perhaps we should have abandoned that in favor of renaming consistently in ever case (although otherwise the library is the best organized one we've ever done!).

Generally speaking though the 1, 2 versions are most likely MF or F dynamics (or can act really as both, being the MAIN full sound of the instrument).

As far as what works with what, this is always best to do by ear no matter what a library says. Your ears will tell you what sounds good for the part better than what it may be called in the library. This especially if you aren't as particular in looking for things expertly in an orchestra and just want results fast... you are probably good with the 1, 2 sounds (the main ones) and then see what else is there and experiment. I agree it doesn't have everything under the sun but actually there IS quite a bit of variety. We have over 4,000 actual programmed patches in this product!

[PaulG]

Kim/Dave,

Thanks for the help.

I am simply looking for some ways to get over this stupid mental hump - I think it's (non-)affectionately been called "analysis paralysis" in other circles, but yeah, you're both right - just digging in rather than trying to make sure x/y/z and xx/yy/zz is available is most likely going to do it for me.

I hope that both of you have a great 2007, and Dave - what's that Miro Star Wars you mentioned? Anything more than the "Squid Wars" demo on the IK/miro site?

[telebunke]

Squids, any chance that we're gonna see a download of a Miro Cubase Project showing how some talented users (like you ) use good ol' Phil?

tele

[Len]

Jonny, sorry, but as a guitar player I'd have to say that does not sound convincing. IMHO.

[telebunke]

Dave, I just listened again to the Philharmonik demo that you made:
Dvorak Symphony number 9 - New World Symphony
It is such a wonder ful piece of music. You wrote that you did it using SX3 and 2 instances of Philharmonik. If you happen to find the project file and put it up somewhere, so we can study how you did it and what patches you used and so forth - that would be so great.
IMHO, by looking deeply into a project like this, one can learn a lot. One can comprehend technical ascpects, like settings in the engine and one can listen to single instrument tracks to find out how it all fits together.
That would be soooooo nice.

cheers
tele

[Squids]

Kim/Dave,

Thanks for the help.

I am simply looking for some ways to get over this stupid mental hump - I think it's (non-)affectionately been called "analysis paralysis" in other circles, but yeah, you're both right - just digging in rather than trying to make sure x/y/z and xx/yy/zz is available is most likely going to do it for me.

I hope that both of you have a great 2007, and Dave - what's that Miro Star Wars you mentioned? Anything more than the "Squid Wars" demo on the IK/miro site?

No, that was just a decoy. It's something else more exciting than that.

[Squids]

Squids, any chance that we're gonna see a download of a Miro Cubase Project showing how some talented users (like you ) use good ol' Phil?

tele

Luca who did some of the demos as well as Larry have done more fascinating things with Miro demos than I have IMO. I may actually have some of their sessions somewhere. I might have mine too somewhere but... well... I agree it's a nice idea. Just revealing! I'd have to take a look at those notes to see! Haha.

[Squids]

Dave, I just listened again to the Philharmonik demo that you made:
Dvorak Symphony number 9 - New World Symphony
It is such a wonder ful piece of music. You wrote that you did it using SX3 and 2 instances of Philharmonik. If you happen to find the project file and put it up somewhere, so we can study how you did it and what patches you used and so forth - that would be so great.
IMHO, by looking deeply into a project like this, one can learn a lot. One can comprehend technical ascpects, like settings in the engine and one can listen to single instrument tracks to find out how it all fits together.
That would be soooooo nice.

cheers
tele

Well, let me see if I can even find it. I've changed computers since then and my files are on different HDs. I did always want to do the whole piece actually. One of my favorite parts is the "Going Home" folk song bit. That's one of my favorite symphonic pieces actually. I liked how it came out although technically I could have made it better if I spent more time on it. At some point I will revisited it or even do it again better. It was a good exercise and I like to challenge myself as a musician... speaking of which I must be crazy because I am challenging myself with some crazy difficult stuff to play this year!!!! I think in my head I might be better than I actually am... but that's a good way to think because you can always catch up! Just takes some practice.

[telebunke]

OK, Squids. If you happen to find it and provide us with the project file, I might arrange for Monica Bellucci to visit you at Music Fair Frankfurt.
Then, she can do some Matrix games with you - how about playing virtual instruments in a virtual world together with her?

tele

[BERFAB]

...and after that we can all go over to David Copperfield's house and you can get him to show us how he made the Statue of Liberty disappear.

Cheers
-B

[PaulG]

I'll skip out on that one. I already know how he did it. 'twas on one of those "secrets revealed" type shows.

Convesely, though, having a DAW project to look at WOULD help some of us neophytes grasp better how things like velocity and layering of sounds affect the overall sound and how to program more productively. Because right now that DOES seem like magic...

(At least Squid's magic is REAL.)

Also - who's to say that having tutorials and demos like that WOULDN'T SELL MORE due to "good sounding output" being at least within the realm of possiblity for those who didn't get a degree in Orchestral Composition.

I am an 80's rocker who writes, well, radio rock for lack of a better term, and haven't had much Miro use since I bought the darn thing due to the inherent complexities of, frankly, ANY orchestral instrument...which are more-than-just sometimes too frustrating for "eventually I'll get it over trial and error" use.

I apologize for my post if it seems "too demeaning" to those who might "already get it." I, myself, however, put it no more above asking a guitar teacher to show you more specifically how they played something so that one could contribute on a higher level musically by knowing it. I used to teach guitar and I know that I'd never look down on a student for asking how I did something.

But since Dave's not accepting money for "Miro Lessons" and he denied my offer of the bubbly AND pissed of Selma, I do highly doubt that anything is going to come of this.

...guess I'll just have to have over Selma to help me not let all this good stuff go to waste. Which is a shame, honestly, because I hardly need "beer goggles" to increase my fondness of her.

Can't win 'em all, I suppose...



- Paul