Need Advice on Orchestral Template

[Paul Battersby]

(10-13-2018, 02:44 PM)Terry93D Wrote: I do indeed need to look into better libraries, at least freebies.

If I may humbly suggest, since you haven't mentioned it and in case it's good enough for your needs, have you considered Virtual Playing Orchestra?

It's built from what I thought were the best and most blendable orchestra samples I could find. It's free and I think, for a free orchestra, fairly complete.

[Terry93D]

(10-13-2018, 03:19 PM)Paul Battersby Wrote:

(10-13-2018, 02:44 PM)Terry93D Wrote: I do indeed need to look into better libraries, at least freebies.

If I may humbly suggest, since you haven't mentioned it and in case it's good enough for your needs, have you considered Virtual Playing Orchestra?

It's built from what I thought were the best and most blendable orchestra samples I could find. It's free and I think, for a free orchestra, fairly complete.

I did look into it months ago but it was on Google Drive, which gives me problems downloading. Going to look...

...have downloaded. Thank you very much. I'll try it out and play with it some and if I like it it'll probably supplant most of what I'm using right now.

[Nayrb]

unable to leave well enough alone I took a crack at a "be all end all template." As a first try it's totally overkill. I think I have something like 80 patches or more loaded up and routed (and this is with some sacrifices). Even without the samples loaded into most of the patches my memory usage is something like 7GB, and I haven't even done anything with it yet.

As an experiment it's pretty humbling. I have 16GB physical memory available and this thing is using almost half of that just on start up. I think my next step would be to pare it down a bit... I approached it by assessing what I had come to use a lot of in my tracks and tried to find a way to stuff it as full as possible so everything was there. I'm learning that I still have a long way to go, but the upshot is that I have a good start on the "modular template" idea where a lot of things already have a potential home and some of the legwork is removed.

Another challenge I'm facing is the fact that I have to spread families and even individual instruments across different instances of Kontakt 4 and Kontakt 6 Player due to various limitations and compatibility issues. There are a couple Sforzando instances in there, too. All of which has resulted in the same quilted nature of my templates thus far.

[Paul Battersby]

Even though I only use a single orchestral library, my template still only contains the instruments I use most often, rather than loading everything I could. For example, I don't often use solo trombone so it's not part of my template though I can easily load it if I do need it. The same is true of the solo strings. I mostly use full instrument sections , so I only load the lesser used solo instruments as needed. I don't feel that needing to load a few extra instruments as needed, has much of an effect on creativity or work flow.

Some composers seem to have everything loaded up into their DAW all the the time, but I've seen others discussing the creation of multiple templates for various purposes. For example, a template for a classical orchestration, would be different from a template for a big band composition or for trailer music.

[Mattias Westlund]

7GB isn't that much. My Lore template weighs in at more than twice that...

The problem I see with modular templates and loading things as you go is that you're going to have to be repeating the same procedures over and over. Need an instrument? Browse for it, load it, set the volume, pan it, add reverb, add any eventual extra processing, etc. Why not keep all the basic building blocks loaded and ready to go so you won't have to hassle with that when all you want to do is keep composing? At least that's my view on having a large, complete(ish) templates. I mean sure, I don't have exotic or uncommon instruments loaded by default, but I don't see why I wouldn't want the entire orchestra loaded. Conserving RAM? I don't normally do anything else on my machine while I'm working in my DAW, to avoid dropouts and glitches, so if the RAM is there and not needed for anything else, why not use it?

Not trying to convince anyone mind you, just expressing why I find it hard to wrap my head around the "load things as needed" approach. It just seems like a lot more work.

[Paul Battersby]

(10-24-2018, 12:15 PM)Mattias Westlund Wrote: The problem I see with modular templates and loading things as you go is that you're going to have to be repeating the same procedures over and over. Need an instrument? Browse for it, load it, set the volume, pan it, add reverb, add any eventual extra processing, etc.

One option is to create multiple templates. One for each group of instruments. So you wouldn't be browsing long lists of instruments, you'd be browsing a shorter list of templates. For example, solo woodwinds could be a template, section woodwinds could be another template with all the panning and volume, reverb, FX, already configured. At least in Reaper, this is easily possible as I would expect it to be easy in most DAWs.

Nothing wrong with always loading up everything all at once. I don't quite do that but my main template contains most of the available instruments. At the other end of the spectrum is starting every composition with an empty DAW every time. Having multiple templates lies in between those extremes, with pros and cons as is true with all compromises.

[Nayrb]

(10-24-2018, 12:15 PM)Mattias Westlund Wrote: 7GB isn't that much. My Lore template weighs in at more than twice that...

This is good to know!

I am definitely leaning toward a more complete approach to a template. I think in my case I have yet to learn just what is going to to be considered "standard" in my templates; but having taken a crack at a very big one and started experimenting with it, I definitely agree with you that not having to do all that extra work over and over is a good thing. Still a ways to go for me, but I'm getting there. At my level I'm still learning when to just experiment and when to trust to what works. Or, perhaps more accurately, still learning what works. I definitely like the idea of enhanced workflow, though, since my latest two tracks have felt like real advancements for me in all ways except those related to template/workflow; in that they are complete messes.

I don't think RAM is going to be an issue, after all. As you say, what the hell else am I going to do with it? I do plan on making the leap to Windows 10 sooner than later to avoid the scramble when support ends. When I do I'll be sure to get the version that allows me access to all the RAM I paid for when I bought the computer. 16GB is nothing to sniff at, but 32 will certainly be nice...

---

(10-24-2018, 02:13 PM)Paul Battersby Wrote:

(10-24-2018, 12:15 PM)Mattias Westlund Wrote: The problem I see with modular templates and loading things as you go is that you're going to have to be repeating the same procedures over and over. Need an instrument? Browse for it, load it, set the volume, pan it, add reverb, add any eventual extra processing, etc.

One option is to create multiple templates. One for each group of instruments. So you wouldn't be browsing long lists of instruments, you'd be browsing a shorter list of templates. For example, solo woodwinds could be a template, section woodwinds could be another template with all the panning and volume, reverb, FX, already configured. At least in Reaper, this is easily possible as I would expect it to be easy in most DAWs.

Nothing wrong with always loading up everything all at once. I don't quite do that but my main template contains most of the available instruments. At the other end of the spectrum is starting every composition with an empty DAW every time. Having multiple templates lies in between those extremes, with pros and cons as is true with all compromises.

I've thought about this, but my issue is that my ideas can be quite spontaneous. Stuff starts one way and ends in a different place entirely. Sure, I strive to stick to an agenda where I feel it will benefit me, but often I end up with three or four different ideas in one project file. It's one of the reasons it's taken me so long to get to the point of making a larger template: learning what all my samples can do.

I've thought about the idea of multiple templates for things like, "action," "ballad," etc etc. But it doesn't really work for me. In the end I feel limited, and again, I spend too much time loading stuff up when inspiration strikes. Maybe if/when I start doing commission work I'll discover what among my available tools and skills can be divided in such a way as to constitute templates in that fashion; but for now I'm still just a guy who makes albums based on his own direction...

The idea of templates based on family is interesting, though. Kind of like a scratch pad that can easily be a complete project, depending on your needs / whim. I'd have a hard time limiting myself, but the building blocks are there.