Is it possible to make instruments sound natural through audio editing like this?

[Pete Cofrancesco]

Wow that’s amazing

[Paul R Johnson]

That's what I thought - with cubase, I got the elements one, or most of it for free and I decided the range of stuff it can do was really impressive. The noise fingerprint looks useful, even though I haven't used it yet - but the thing I have used is where you take a mix from years back - extract the stems and then you can re-balance it. My recordings from the 90s, as I'm a bass player historically, were always a bit bass heavy - and you can split the recording, then lower the bass, but leaving the piano left hand - really neat! Oddly - Steinberg's videos are pointed at modern EDM dance music creators, leaving the old fogeys like me to work out which bits would work for us. It's clever enough to hear the difference between piano and electric piano. Just a few years ago we told people reverb was permanent, and likened it to removing one ingredient from a finished cake - it couldn't be done, and now we can.

[Paul R Johnson]

Ryan - watch this video to the end, and tell me that this would not be exactly what your composer should have in his machine. 25Gb later - it's mine.

YouTube (Short URL)

[Ryan Elder]

I watched it. Thanks for that. So yes, my composer does seem to have that type of machine from what I can tell. Why?

[Paul R Johnson]

Good - because note how that guy way writing music using that one new package, and kept talking about how important it was to watch the visuals. Note how the exact instrument was not important at all, but what was, was how it was played. That bit of software takes samples of real instruments blends them together into the kind of stuff you need, and that single package is less than two hundred dollars, once you've got the player on your computer. Going through the combination patches - some have low flutes in the blend - but the point here is the combination of the sounds. Can you perhaps see better why picking a single sound as a foundation may be the wrong approach, for professional, quality audio for your movie?

[Ryan Elder]

Oh yes, I know what you mean. What I did was, I would show the composer sounds I wanted, and he would tell me what instruments those were so we could keep track of how to get those sounds. For example one sound I showed him he said was a base trombone, and a tenor trombone being played simultaneously. Or another sound I wanted he said was a cello and a viola being played simultaneously. So he just made a note of what instruments in order to get that combination sound. But I know what you mean, about the sounds being played a certain way. I would show the composer the sounds I wanted and then he would make notes of what instruments they were, for reference.

But it seems that he cannot get the sounds from some movies, even if he has the same instruments. For example, one of the example tracks I told him I thought would be good, the instrument on it was a celeste he said, but the celeste samples he tried out, just didn't sound the same as in the movie, and gave off a very different feel, even though it was the same instrument.

[Greg Miller]

Originally Posted by Ryan Elder

one of the example tracks I told him I thought would be good, the instrument on it was a celeste he said, but the celeste samples he tried out, just didn't sound the same as in the movie, and gave off a very different feel, even though it was the same instrument.

But it wasn't the same instrument! It was an entirely different instrument, just with the same name. More than one company makes a celeste, and they are recorded in many different studios using many different mics. (even ignoring the ones that are electronic, not a real physical instrument) Surely you don't expect every combination to sound the same. That's why Strads and Guarneris are famous (and famously expensive): they sound better than other violins. A recording made on a smartphone, in the St. Louis Aquarium, compared to one made in Severance Hall using Telefunken mics and a Nagra digital recorder, will not "sound the same": they were made with different recording instruments. And yet you think it's noteworthy that the two celestes "don't sound the same"? The longer this thread goes on, the more it becomes clear that you just don't "get" music. I mean ... you don't seem to have the least little bit of "common sense" about this facet of what you're doing. Yet you keep trying to apply "Ryan-think" to your hypothetical musical score.

Ryan, many people here are trying to help you, and are giving you a lot of advice. After each suggestion is posted, you reply in essence, "Yes, but here's what I did and what happened." The people here are already aware that the process is frustrating and the results are unsatisfactory to you; they are trying to give you other options. Yet you seem to keep doing things your own way. It seems you don't much want to take advice; then why are you asking for it? And why do you keep defending the way you've done things up 'til now? Do you think you will eventually convince people here that they are wrong and you are right?

[Ryan Elder]

Sorry I don't mean to not take advice. I appreciate the advice. It's just when people tell me to let the composer have free reign and work behind my back, and then expect good results, this didn't happen in the past. On my past projects, I was told the music was not good. On here I was told this as well.

So I feel if I do the same thing again, I will have the same results. It's just risky. So when the advice is telling me to be risky, I am weary of it going wrong again, since it did in the past, that's all. I am just trying to figure out the reason, why take the same risk again, and to expect a different result. That's just the part I do not understand in the advice.

So I thought if I made sure the music was more like more professional tracks in more professional movies, than that is probably better than leaving it up to chance and the unknown. I just don't understand what the benefit of taking the same risks are, and no one has commented on what to do if the same results yield, if I do the same thing again.

But it just seems the advice is too take the same risk again and that will be better. That's the part I just don't understand. So it's not that I don't mean to take the advice, I just want to understand why I am doing it, especially when it has not worked for me before.

[Greg Miller]

Originally Posted by Ryan Elder

when people tell me to let the composer have free reign and work behind my back

If someone said those words, I missed it. Of course on a thread with 383 posts (and counting) and the same things said over and over again, how can we expect any clarity. Perhaps other specific words that you misinterpreted? Footnotes, please.

[Ryan Elder]

Well I was told to just describe what I want in words to the composer, the feeling I want, and to leave them to it. Doesn't that mean free reign on what to do, after I tell them what I want? However, if I have misinterpreted the advice in anyway, then I apologize. I am greatful for the advice. I have followed some of it so far for sure.

[Paul R Johnson]

Can we hear what music you have had before, that people have told you was the good. There is always the possibility you have taken advice wrongly, and misunderstood, like you do here all the time. Your current insistence that composing must be a ‘we’ process, a collaboration, rather than your composers own work, is going to spoil it. Consider your credits. Music by Fred smith or music by Fred smith and ryan Wray?

However the more we go on and on, I wonder about your composer, because he is starting to sound like a pianist who composes the old fashioned way, and is not at all comfy with technology. Both of you talk about instruments as if they are the main feature. This Celeste rubbish for example. Orchestral Celestes are one of the instruments that, like harps, do NOT sound like people think they do. They’re a family of instrument, and as reformists discover, each is unique, but for movie music, they end up treated, and enhanced to make them the bell like pure tone that everyone ‘thinks’ celestes sound like. This is what Greg is talking about. In a cathedral, they sound wonderful because of the building. The Celeste usually sounds pretty horrid in somebodies house, or in the studio. If you have a synth Celeste sound, that is not remotely what they sound like. Your composer seems very green on substitution.

[Ryan Elder]

Oh when you say the music before that people told me was good, do you mean the tracks I chose for this one, or music from past projects that is good?

[Paul R Johnson]

I mean the people who told you the music was bad - before you do anything, perhaps we should investigate of they were correct? If they didn't like the music they could be correct and there is a problem, or they could simply have been wrong?

[Ryan Elder]

Sure. Here is one where I was told so, or it was not bad, but just generic perhaps.

In the Mood For Wrath - YouTube

[Paul R Johnson]

Well - my view is that it's often far, far too loud, which makes it stand out, but some is missing. The scene of the bad guys with the bats going up the stairs - where is the tension building music, but then at the end scene we get quite epic, but detached music. It's not in my view appropriate - it's the sort of thing you'd use to be patriotic or proud or triumphant, it's too nice for the action. There's also silence at the end.

None is bad music, but levels are extreme, and while most fits the mood, that end scene is spoiled by the music, not enhanced. Not what the average listener/viewer would expect. Sometimes you can do it with mismatched music for effect - Pearl Harbour, and other war movies often have very contrasting music - to make the images detached. The suspense building music on the stairs is a cliche of movie music, and works well - so odd you didn't use it. I'm surprised your comments said the music was bad. Maybe you just didn't polish it properly but much is fine, bar the weird style at the end.

Your audio needs work - all the cuts in the edit in the office have very obviously edited sound - the background noise changes quite clearly on the cuts. some are severe and even with the music blasting away can still be heard.