Les Brockmann: More Bits, More People
Feb 22nd, 2010 | Category: Articles, technical
Seems like there are a lot of ways to spend your money these days, often more money than may be coming in. What are the right choices to move your career forward? Here are a couple of contrasting ideas, both worth considering in their own context.
More bits
To start with, here I am wearing my “technical guru” hat. Let’s review some things about digital and computer audio; there’s a new technical trend and product you should be aware of.
You probably know that digital audio, in the files we create and the way in the signals can flow from one piece of equipment to another, can be in a variety of different sample rates (44.1KHz, 48KHz, etc.) and word lengths (usually 24-bit for most professional applications). (If you need a refresher, check my article “Technical Guidelines for Film and TV Scoring — Part 1“.) Recently there has been a lot of talk about “32-bit” and “64-bit” — how does that fit into all of this?
The new Apple Mac Pro computers with Intel Core2 Duo processors and the newest operating system, 10.6 (Snow Leopard) are said to be 64-bit capable. Do they sound even better? No, not necessarily. 32-bit and 64-bit don’t have anything to do with digital audio formatting or fidelity. What this is all about is the ability of any individual software app to access on-board RAM memory.
With 32-bit capability, which is how things have been up until now, an app such as our familiar DAW hosts Digital Performer, Logic, etc., can have a current working file size of up to 4 gigabytes. This includes the amount of memory that is needed for plug-in soft synths, many of which are getting to be pretty substantial memory hogs. This would include, but not limited to, such popular products as Omnisphere, Trillian, Ivory, and the various orchestral library sample players. Maybe you’ve noticed, by the time you get a few of those instantiated, your DAW becomes logy, slower and less responsive, maybe crashy. It’s not just processor power, it’s memory handling.
When clients ask me about buying a computer, a common question is how much RAM memory to equip it with? The computers can hold more and more, but if the DAW can only be filled up to 4 GB then the practical guidelines have been maybe 8 GB total. But that’s not the case anymore; on a new machine I would recommend 16 GB or more — I think very shortly you are going to be able to put that to good use.
In order to run more soft synths, there have been work-arounds that some composers have used. A common and practical one is Plogue Bidule. This app runs in the background along with your DAW, talks to it (sound and MIDI) via ReWire, and can act as host for plug-in soft synths in a variety of formats. The instruments connect to and can be programmed in your DAW software but are not limited by how much memory an individual app can access, at least up to the 4 GB limit. So effectively you can double your capacity, with some soft synths in your DAW and some in Plogue.
But now we are entering the era of 64-bit memory accessing, so this limitation is going to go away. With 64-bit, a processor can address up to 16 exabytes of memory (that’s over 16 billion gigabytes)! Now the DAWs, sample players, and other apps have to be re-written in order to take advantage of this. Some already have: Logic 9.1 is 64-bit ready, and (some) SpectraSonics synths. Others can be expected to join the party certainly within the next year or so.
Meanwhile there is another “background”-type host which looks to be an even better bet than Plogue: Vienna Ensemble Pro. This was built for their excellent Vienna Orchestra sample sets, but can work with other brand plug-ins as well, and the advantage is that it comes with both 32-bit and 64-bit versions — you can run both at the same time, hosting whichever format your individual sample instruments might support. Composer Joel Goodman, recently installed these and reports that his performance with Digital Performer 7.1 has been generally smooth and trouble free (well … we are talking software here!). (Special thanks to Joel who brought me up to speed on this stuff.)
More people
Now let’s talk about something that will make your music even more exciting than the best software instruments, I promise.
How many of you would be willing to take your entire fee from a gig, maybe even several gigs, and invest it in the newest greatest computer software or hardware upgrade? “Yeah, I can see that, it keeps getting better and you gotta keep up, right?”
Now, how many of you would be willing to take that same pile of money and invest it in a room full of expert studio musicians, for one day? Or maybe just a few of them?
Not so easy, is it? “My clients don’t really care. There’s no budget for it, or time. I’m barely making ends meet as it is.”
I’ve observed something from my engineer’s chair: Everybody’s got about the same computer tools, and you need them of course. But the typical one-man band-in-a-box score is a pretty good way to get more of the same kind of work you already have, but not necessarily to move a career forward.
A couple of examples come to mind: most people are familiar with the composer Michael Giacchino. A couple of years ago at the SCL annual meeting, he told the story of his big break, when he insisted on using a live orchestra to score a video game. Now of course that’s not uncommon — thank you Michael! I don’t think he’ll ever reach for Omnisphere when he wants to pull someone’s heartstrings.
Or, closer to my home: composer Miriam Cutler, whose documentary scores always feature as many live warm human beings playing instruments as she can possibly squeeze in. Often they are recorded one at a time, in her personal studio, and sometimes layered with electronic textures as well, but the net effect is an organic and emotional sound that keeps her in demand in her chosen genre. I know she’ll agree that insisting on live musicians is a big part of what gives her music the magic that clients notice.
Think about it: when you add even one more expert player to your mix, you are doubling the intellectual and creative firepower. And in a city like Los Angeles, there is an incredible wealth of experienced players who have “been there and done that” over and over. They bring not only the ability to play a part in tune and expressively, but help solve dramatic problems, improvise in just the right way for the emotion of a scene, or give an immediate sonic spark that you’d never get out of East-West Quantum Leap even if you worked all night.
If you’re not in Southern California (or just want to stay off the freeway), ask me and I can refer you to amazing musicians with personal studios and high-speed Internet who can work with you anywhere in the world — guitarists in every style from metal to ethnic world sounds, woodwinds and brass players, harp, bass, a pianist with an amazing Bösendorfer piano, some percussionists, fiddle and other strings, kick-ass drummers, even a pretty good mixing engineer :-) . All with experience in major motion picture and television scores.
I have to admit, I’m not a composer and I don’t write the checks. Maybe yet another episode of a reality series is not the time to suddenly splurge on a bunch of live guys (although check out “Lost”); if so then what about the next big pitch demo? You will have to find the right time and place, but I strongly believe it’s worthwhile.
What do you think? I’d be very interested to have composers weigh in with comments about when and if you have worked with expert live players (no matter where you are located), and what your experience was.
Who is your secret weapon (don’t worry we won’t tell), player or players that you couldn’t do a score without? Did you ever try live musicians and then regret it? Did you ever work with a musician who gave you fantastic results that you never would have expected? Did you learn something? Did your clients (or demo targets) care, or notice? Did you get the gig? Would you do it again?
Related posts:
Loading ...
“Maybe yet another episode of a reality series is not the time to suddenly splurge on a bunch of live guys (although check out “Lost”)”
Lost is real? ZOMG! I knew it!!!! :)
I love the sentiment of 'more people'. I agree! Even just one player can enhance the value of a piece immensely – even if that player is you – see Nathan Barr's work on True Blood – great cello textures and melodies!
Also, a great point about doubling (or more) your 'intellectual and creative firepower'. It has the added benefit of being infinitely more fun and educational.
I'm also forever impressed by how a little dot and squiggle results in such fantastic sound in the hands of a good player. Knowing that makes editing midi-controllers and velocity all the more painful.
I was discussing this very topic with my scoring mixer yesterday. He comes to my studio and makes good samples sound great. To be able to take the credit for the combined skills and wisdom of a group of specialists is a privilege. While many of us have multiple areas of skill and knowledge, if we were to rate our various skills on a table of one to ten, we would not have nearly as many “tens” as we would if we hired skilled people.
I have often said, “If I am the best bass player on the date – we're in trouble”
Thanks, Les.
Thanks for the info, Les—and even more so for the thoughts to ponder toward the end of this article. Seriously important stuff for both the long term and the short term career.
I'm guessing some of the resistance to hiring players comes from two sources:
A) a sort of resentment that the budget for musicians should have to come out of our pocket, rather than the producer's (the implicit 'deal' of the package deal); and…
B) the notion that a piece of gear or sample library can be used over and over again on different projects, whereas the musicians we hire are able to enhance only one project at a time.
None of that detracts from what, to me, is the biggest insight here: for composers to move up, our stuff has to be IMPROVE. Same old routine, same old sounds… same old results. Working with individuals, as Bellis says below, means that we have a chance to incorporate a real FORCE MULTIPLIER into our creative process. The project benefits, but so do we. And those benefits—that learning—stays with us even longer than a piece of gear.
I feel like a bit of a hypocrite writing this, as most of my gigs are all-synth. Yup. But whenever I do get to use real human beings on a score, I feel a powerful urge to step up my game. Don't you other composers out there find that to be true as well?
Stepping up to doing a live session for a gig is sort of like upgrading your studio gear, in that one change (incorporating live players) occasions all sort of other changes: finding a venue, an engineer, music prep people, orchestrator(s), etc. But it's a step without which we'll never progress to our highest level of output. Simple as that.
You hear directors yearning to shoot things “real for real”—using CGI only when they HAVE to. (Check out some of the bonus materials on the latest Star Trek movie for a brief discussion of this). I think what we're talking about here is sort of the same thing… and, in a better world, would be regarded as such by filmmakers.
Thanks, Les, for putting this topic out there for discussion.
This was of great insight for me, Les.
My questions concern the unions. How does a beginning composer get far enough ahead budget-wise to enable hiring union players? Here at Berklee, we have access to the school's musicians, many of whom are quite amazing. Yet, when I leave here in June I'll need to look outside the walls of education for pro players, and had I been in that situation lately, I simply wouldn't have been able to afford to pay union wages. I'd love to hear more about how independent composers are negotiating for union rates on their projects and how receptive indie producers have been to becoming union signatories overall.
I've scored 40 something short films, and about 10 features, and have never done a film without at least one live musician (though sometimes that one musician is me). I hate working with sampled orchestral sounds, synth sounds give me a headache, perhaps because I grew up playing clarinet in orchestras, and I'm kind of an old school orchestral composer. But even when I do an ambient score, I can't help but record organic elements and putting electronic processing on them.
I also hate spending hours and hours editing and programming a midi tracks, that takes a minute for a musician to play. So I see value in hiring live musicians, as it saves me a lot of time and trouble. Sure, I still have to do mockups, but I just don't bother nuancing every little detail to make it sound more realistic.
Also it does pay off in your demo reel, or if you license your track out. Good production value can make a difference if your demo reel is the only one in the pile that has live orchestra. Filmmakers have told me this was the reason my reel stood out when they heard it. And a good number of tracks on my reel are sampled orchestra sweetened with several live players. I typically record 3 or more live strings over sampled strings, use sampled percussion, and overdub one of each wind/brass instrument that I need. And I try to write for what I can afford, so if I only have one wind instrument, I'll write soloistically for that instrument and use sampled winds for background textures.
As for getting a budget to get live musicians, I never ask for money to hire musicians. Now, mind you, my films have all been low budget indie films, and when the filmmakers ask me what it'll cost to score their film, I give them an estimate which already includes the cost of however many musicians I think I need to create an acceptable sounding product, and I let them know what they are getting for their money. Sure sometimes I've lost gigs b/c they didn't have the money to hire me, but I've been happy with the ones I have gotten, and have consistently created great sounding music that the filmmakers are excited about.
One other thing, and this isn't always possible, but it's nice to write for the budget you have. I had a short last year that was intimate and romantic, and I had a budget for 2 live musicians, so rather than write a sampled orchestral score sweetened with a couple of musicians, I wrote for a violin, upright bass, and piano trio. I played piano (“programmed” would be more accurate as I'm a lousy pianist), and recorded two friends of mine. Which by the way, if you're working on small projects and don't want to record w/ union musicians, make friends with some young up and coming musicians (or even composers like myself that play an instrument. I occasionally record clarinet or ethnic wind parts for other composers, and can even do them in my studio and email the tracks), or hit up college music majors. LA is full of talented musicians at USC and UCLA, or you can meet people at concerts, and once you know one or two musicians, they are usually happy to recommend you to others. Anyways, I hope to hear more scores with real musicians performing on them!
“But whenever I do get to use real human beings on a score, I feel a powerful urge to step up my game. Don't you other composers out there find that to be true as well?”
Absolutely – putting yourself in that pressure zone is a great way to learn and improve. Even if one is recording a top flight soloist, one looks at their score and *really* considers – is this good? Am I sloughing it off in some way, being lazy? Could it be great? Stress sucks, but pressure is a great thing.
Involving other experts, so long as you are honest and humble, is great because you'll inevitably receive great feedback. I usually get raked over the coals for one thing or another, and so I rarely make the same mistakes twice. Work with people who are better than you – it's like a paid mini-mentorship!
Fantastic tips! “Write for what you can afford” is a positive approach, turning virtually every low budget situation into an opportunity for wonderful music.
“Sure sometimes I've lost gigs b/c they didn't have the money to hire me, but I've been happy with the ones I have gotten, and have consistently created great sounding music that the filmmakers are excited about.”
That's brilliant advice. Looking back on my career some time in the future, I hope to say exactly that.
Hi folks, me again,
I would sure give thumbs up to the concept “write for the budget you have”. A couple of years ago I saw that put to an extreme and successful test, when Fox ordered new scores to several 1920's John Ford silent movies: Just Pals, score by Jon and Al Kaplan, Three Bad Men, score by Dana Kaproff, and Hangman's House, score by Tim Curran.
Bear in mind that a silent movie is all music, all of the time, and no place to hide! Kind of like a 90-minute album with picture added.
The “rules” were three musicians, no MIDI. Each composer approached it a little differently. They all started with piano, played by Bryan Pizzone, who can definitely read spots off a running leopard at 1000 yards . . . Then Jon and Al added in clarinetist Michael Grego and fiddler Richard Greene, Dana went with guitarist John Goux, and Richard Greene, and Tim chose cellist Sebastian Toettcher and flutist Sheridan Stokes. (For photos and excerpts check my website.)
And in each case I mixed “live” — no tedious and expensive post mix — so: four coordinated performances.
Each composer definitely hit it out of the park in his own unique way. It was exciting to be part of it. I know it took guts to plan it all out, get it copied, and then trust the collaborators, especially the musicians.
Not every job gives you quite that degree of taking a swan dive with no safety net, but in reality there was a safety net — the masterful musicians. And the best part is, those deceptively simple scores will sound just as great in ten or fifty years; try that with MIDI!
Alexis,
Those issues aren't really my area of expertise, but a big issue here I know.
Maybe someone else can fill in more info. It's a delicate thing, food for an entire separate discussion – - or ask around when you are out of school.
I'm a french beginning composer and I usually do exactly the same thing (a few live players layered with synths, writing solos for them, etc…). Indeed, it's true, it makes the difference when you want to get a gig afterwards.Live players enhance your music and the directors perceive it, even if they cannot say it's because of live players.
By another route, I compose essentially for short films (about 30 now). When someone is telling you he has no budget, don't believe him (in France, a lot of beginning directors spend their budget without planning the costs of music). There is ALWAYS money somewhere. If you insist, if you explain that a few live players are enough to enhance your music and by the way THEIR movie, they suddenly decide to give you the few euros you want. It changed my professionnal life to keep that in mind. Henceforth,I get a recording budget almost all the time, even if it's an amateur or a student project (besides it's easier in the amateur area! Strange but true). And perforce, it's easier for me to convince clients to hire me.. and to give me a budget for live players since the music they liked is made with live players! It's a virtuous circle, redoubling efficient!
Wow! Where these “rules” set by Fox? That seems an unusually gutsy and innovative move on the part of a media giant. Usually, I would imagine the execs wringing their hands about the score sounding too “small”. A musical tightrope walk indeed!
Well . . . the rules weren't dictated by Fox, exactly; there was a total of five films and and overall maximum budget. The “chief” composer and music supervisor, Christopher Caliendo, worked with the Fox producers to decide which film got what.
I wasn't involved in the discussions, but I expect there was some sense that they wanted some of the films to have bigger sounding scores, and some more intimate. I'm sure they also agreed to avoid sample and synthesizer sounds, which would have been out of character.
The other two films were scored by Caliendo, and they got somewhat larger ensembles: Iron Horse, about 40, and Four Sons, about 20.