Composing/Film Scoring Studio - Recommendations?

[SF_Guy]

I'm putting together a new composing studio (Film/Games). This is what I'm thinking:

Mac Pro
Logic Pro 7 (Do I dare say 8)
Apogee Symphony
" Rosetta 200
" Big Ben
Millennia HV-3
Great River MP-2NV
Korby Kat System
Neumann KM 184 (2)
UA LA-2A
UA 1176
TC Electronics 4000
Altiverb 6
UAD-1e
GigaStudio 3.0
Sample Libraries: VSL, BFD, Symphonic Choirs, Spectrasonics
Genelec 8050

Any other recommendations?

[blackwatch]

nice list

get a second machine to run your gigstudio and vsti's

ditch the 184's for some shure's and put that extra bread on drugs

[klaukholm]

Both film and video games are done in surround so I would swap the TC4000 for a system 6000.
I would also look into getting a quintet of M150's (or M50's) and a large selection of spotmics like TLM170, U87, Schoeps cmc54, DPA 4012/12.
Rosetta is not up to the job, go for AD16X.
Protools is standard for scoring sessions. I would look at getting atleast an HD2 system.

[Roland]

Originally Posted by klaukholm

Both film and video games are done in surround so I would swap the TC4000 for a system 6000.
I would also look into getting a quintet of M150's (or M50's) and a large selection of spotmics like TLM170, U87, Schoeps cmc54, DPA 4012/12.
Rosetta is not up to the job, go for AD16X.
Protools is standard for scoring sessions. I would look at getting atleast an HD2 system.

In fairness, I think (looking at his gear list) he's talking about getting into the Writting/scoring side, for actual orchestral "film" sessions not only would he need a whole lot of microphones, but his whole equipment list would have to be of a different order.

In the uk (and we do a lot of the Hollywood film sessions here) there are only really 5 studio's/facilities that do major filmscore work on a regular basis.

Regards to all



Roland

[GOD]

Fairlights CC-1 crystal core would be a good start
I do a lot of work for Xbox and playstation gaming, so with the onboard screen and the speed at which I can work, NOTHING touches it

[SF_Guy]

This studio will be used for composing/recording music created by samples, along with tracking a few live instruments. I'll goto a larger studio for ensemble recording.

I've been debated whether to get ProTools HD. What do you think?

[pramrod]

HD no question... logic blech... HD, quicktime movies right on a track, done deal... do it all the time, yeah yeah... enjoy pram

[rodrigo]

Maybe you could add some ethnic instrument, like Quantum Leap RA, or somethin' like that. My personal opinion is that you don't have to go the Pro Tools route for this stuff. If you're mixing just the music, you could always deliver your files for surround encoding. If you're mixing the whole deal (dialogue, foley, sfx, etc...) then Pro Tools is probably a must have. If you're used to/happy with Logic, stick with it. Good luck

[Greg Curtis]

PT HD is the scoring standard.

[edham]

While PT is the standard on the scoring stage its not for composing.
Digital Performer - Logic - Cubase are the main daws that composers are using.

Mixes are bounced to stems out of those daws and imported into PT for recording the orchestra and on to the mix stage.

My question to the original poster is - are you trying to mock full orchestra stuff?? or just needing some samples to go along with what you are tracking?

If you are trying to mock up full orchestra stuff for film/tv/multimedia your proposed system is slanted more towards higher quality tracking and misallocating resources in that direction. To mock up full orchestrations you need to head in a different direction.

To address your system specifically -
Gigastudio is not needed at this point. The libs you mention don't use it. Most libs don't anymore. Kontakt 2 is the current standard and most libs are using their own software. VSL now has its own player.

One Mac pro is not able to load a full orchestra template using the sample libraries you listed. You will need sample farm daws.

http://www.vi-control.net/forum/view...41de0ba9d4af34

This is the main forum for guys who are making a living scoring.
There are a couple other forums but those trend towards hobbiest although you may not get that at first due to the stong opinions they will offer. Once you hear there music you will realize this.

VSL's VI edition will require at least 4 farm computers. This is due to the the amount of ram each orchestra section will require. Even if you fully load your Macpro with ram (and thats a lot of money at the moment) your session loading times will be insane. Like 20 minutes to load that many samples. Then you get a crash and have to reboot ..... basically its not a workable solution unless you feel like pulling your hair out waiting for your computer to load.

Most guys are using one computer as their main daw. In my case I do not load any samples in this daw. This lets me change cues in seconds since the files load superfast.
Sample libraries are loaded in my farm daws. (currently shuttle pc's but moving to mac minis soon). With the sample farms I only need to load them once in the morning as I use the same templates for all cues. this takes time to develop but once you nail it its a thing of beauty.
Once I am working on a cue I will then load additional samples in my main daw Mac. Rather than change my big template I just add the new things in my main daw.

Symphonic choirs itself really could use 2 computers as a full load is around 3 gigs of ram. VSL can get going on 3 but there are guys who want a full up orchestra and they are using 5-8 farm pcs to achieve that.

You may want to not get the TC reverb as altiverb will give you everything you need plus it will recall with the session. Also the UAD card is probably redundant. the horsepower of a macpro will be far more than enough. The big ben is also overkill imho. The clock in the rosetta is certainly good enough. Take that money and buy some mac mini's.
The rosetta may not be the best interface for your purposes since you will need more inputs from the farm daws.

Do some research on the types of rigs guys are using at this point. We all would love to be able to work inside one computer but the libraries have gotten so damn good and HUGE that farm pc's are the only workable solution at this point in time.

Your choice of VSL is a good one. Will take more work in setting up a template and learning to mix it but it is capable of the most realism at this point. If you hate mixing than look at EWQLSO.
Symphonic choirs is unmatched so far. VSL has a choir coming next year but as of now EW owns the market.

Best of luck on setting up your system. Buy the big bottle of advil to go with the logic manual.!! (logics a great daw - I'm just not smart enough to use it)

[chrisso]

I agree with some of the previous posts.
I've spent ten years scoring for film & tv and have acouple of friends who have gotten further than me in the same business.
Really it doesn't matter what DAW you are using.
If you think you might move between home studio and tracking facilities, which I have and my friends do all the time, then Pro Tools is probably the easiest way to go.
Having said that, one friend uses Performer too and the other Cubase. They need better midi capability then Pro Tools can handle.
IME, scoring is mostly about inspiration and speed. In which case I would spend the majority of my money on sound sources and samples.
Film editors and directors can't tell the difference between a 16bit sample and 24. I've co-written scores with mates who had lower grade equipment than me. They've turned in twice as many cues as me, while I was fussing over the exact eq and pan placement etc. Obviously, the higher up you go, the higher the benchmark. So your mileage may vary.
I wouldn't suggest buying more than two (different) mics. I rarely record more than one real player at a time. Neither do my friends.
Are you already into the scoring scene?
If not, I would caution against spending a lot of money.
It is highly competative and it's normal to do very low paid work, or no paid work, just to get a foot in the door and a showreel/resume together.
For beginners I would suggest a cheapish DAW (Pro Tools, if you want to start getting experience on it). A powerful computer. Loads of software, soft synths, virtual instruments, orchestral libraries, sample libraries etc....
A big TV monitor and a decent sounding playback system (mixer, amp and speakers).
Film/TV directors and editors will often come to your studio to review your progress and listen to your ideas.
It helps (psychologically if the place looks professional and hi-tech). Also Edham is right, it also helps if everything is fast and recall-able.

[klaukholm]

I can ask around, but as far as I know most of the composers I know from LA do work in protools as well as the aforementioned systems.

It would also be advantageous to have Finale and possibly Sibelius.
It all depends on the work you will do. The composers we work with find themselves in many different roles depending on the project.
sometimes all they do is compose on the keyboard while others receive a midi file and arrange it all while a third person cleans it up and makes performance parts (typically at 4am on the day it is being recorded)
Other projects they find themselves being the arranger or the copyist.

Editing is also a big part of the work. If you write for videogames you may need to write actual code as was the case for Tobias Enhus in spideman 3, but then again tobias is pretty cutting edge.

In other words, you might as well get atleast a small one card HD system as a working knowledge of Protools is a good thing to have in that business.

[tonerowlabs]

anyone who tells you PT is better than Logic or DP for orchestral scoring is... okay, i'm new here, and i should probably focus on making friends first. But wow. I use all three regularly, and i continuallly find myself shaking my head in disgust with PT. Just absolutely horrible. Dragging a note on or off to frame - pretty basic stuff, and it was impossible in PT until 7.3, making it about 4-5 years behind DP or Logic. Some serious catching up to do.

Besides, it seems to me that there are fewer reasons to stick with one platform nowadays than before.

Setting aside the perennial DAW debate, I'd propose that you take the money you'd save by NOT going HD2, add a Weiss DS1 (SUPERB for digitally mastering orchestral music), and increase your marketing budget by $10,000 and call it a (good) day, IMHO.

[edham]

I know of no one who uses PT as their daw for composing orchestral film music.
Lot's of guys ALSO have PT but mostly for mix and the occasional compatiblity thing.

The original poster stated "This studio will be used for composing/recording music created by samples, along with tracking a few live instruments. I'll goto a larger studio for ensemble recording."

For composing using sampled orchestral libraries (he listed VSL and EW) all the posts about needing HD or better reverbs, mics etc are not addressing the massive computer, ram, hard drive, slave sample computers, inputs, etc. that these libraries require.

I own a PT HD3 accel rig. For composing orchestral based stuff I simply don't use it. Not a sinlge part of it. Any other daw software is much better for composing this sort of stuff and PT hardware is limited when using other daws. Limited in stability in DAE mode (DP and Logic) and limited in inputs when using coreaudio.

Composing with orchestral samples is its own thing with very different needs and challenges than recording anything.

I can't think of one major composer who uses PT as their main daw and not one of the second tier guys I know use PT either. Most all HAVE PT for the obvious reasons but none that I am aware of use it day in and day out for composing this type of music.
Not digi bashing at all here. Its just not even close to being an adequate tool in this area.

[klaukholm]

Originally Posted by edham

I know of no one who uses PT as their daw for composing orchestral film music.
Lot's of guys ALSO have PT but mostly for mix and the occasional compatiblity thing.

Just for clarity that is what I was referring to.
For the record, we are Pyramix people here and have let our businesspartner take care of the Protools side when clients come in who need HD.

[edham]

Kjeti,
sorry if my posts came out too strong.
I may only be expressing a hint of the massive amount of suffering that I and all others have suffered as sample libraries have grown and software and formats are changing almost annually at this point.

What worked last year completely changed this year.
Gigastudio has lost its groundbreaking standard status as Kontakt took over but only after insane buggy releases and NI leaving it for dead for almost a year!
VSL wrote its own software but not without a year of difficulties for early adopters mostly due to synchrosoft dongle issues (I was not on the bleeding edge for this one as i have not much blood left to give). NI finally got it together for Kontakt 2 but it was a LONG wait. Now EW has a new sample player showing at namm ........ never ends. And of course there is Apple - the switch to intel literally stalled software updates for the year as that's where developers had to spend there dollars. Makes no sense to debug G5 app when were all moving to intel. (end rant...)

MacPro's are killer machines but the ram for them is off the charts expensive and when using huge sample libs ram is the cheif bottleneck at the moment.

My intent is only to try and save our inital poster some pain and suffering. I guess thats a form of self healing for those of us that are the walking wounded/bleeding edge and now broke - composers! Their are many guys who shared knowledge and saved us all alot of money and headaches. I'm just pitching in with the same intent.

By next year who knows - digi may nail the midi side - add sibelius notation within the app and reign supreme. Or Logic 8 may finally address its shortcomings and be a pleasure to work on (not holding my breath on either of these thoughts).

All I know is every time I buy a new sample lib I end up building another PC to run it one as my system is already maxed out. Its just crazy at this point. Maybe apple will debut a new laptop with 20 gigs of ram and macworld on tuesday and my fantasy machine will start shipping ..........

[klaukholm]

Hey, no offense taken whatsoever!
I am not even a composer. All I really know is what I see and hear when they blow into town for a week of sessions.
I honestly don't know much about what goes on before the session material is ready, but they all know and use protools at that point.

The annual cost to stay competitive seems very high indeed.
Those guys also have their own libraries done in Moscow and London at significant cost.

[Albert]

Originally Posted by klaukholm

I can ask around, but as far as I know most of the composers I know from LA do work in protools as well as the aforementioned systems.

This has already been covered, but I want to add emphasis.

Protools in LA is used on the scoring stage. This is why you see the ProTools systems coming in to your town for sessions.

But for writing, composers are generally using Digital Performer, Logic and there are Cubase users as well. Composers often have a ProTools setup for compatibility reasons, but don't use it as their main composing sequencer.

ProTools is just very inadequate when it comes to the midi side of things. Digital Performer has *far* more advanced scoring tools available.

[Bassmankr]

Any computer box you buy is going to have it's limit of instruments it will play at the same time (disk drive speed is the weak link), so some composers go the route of many cheap boxes (think Zimmer) to get alot of sampled instruments (think orchestra). If you use a real mixer you can treat each extra cheapo box the same you would an outboard synth and bring them back into your main recording box simply that way. All this depends on what your needs and budget are but going the "many cheapo boxes" route will allow you to keep adding boxes as your needs arise. Keep them in a ventilated separate room or closet if you can because the fan noise and heat of multiple boxes will add up.

You should be able to put together at least 4 cheapo boxes for the same hardware cost of a quad (alot more if you build them yourself or have a friend that will). If you go the one box route you will have to render, freeze, and commit to submixes to have lots of instruments but with enough time it's doable.

Use an app called "Netop" to control your multiple boxes from your main box moniter(s)/keyboard/mouse. It's just basically remote control software that works via the LAN, this will let you load up your instruments of choice on the farm boxes. You will also need to feed midi to each of the cheapo boxes from your main recording box. Surprisingly a cheap $10 soundblaster live clone sound card will work fine for the extra boxes if you use the "B" set of outputs and skip the soundblaster drivers (only use the free on the net "Project KX" drivers). The midi in/out cord for those sound cards is another $15. So for about $25 per box you can get midi in and sound out of the farm boxes. The cheapo boxes will not need a moniter but most likely will need a keyboard and mouse connected to them wherever they are stored. As for a video card (even with no moniter you need a video card) pick up an AGP slot Matrox G450 for $15 on the net. These are the best video cards for DAW's as they give duel moniter support, look good and don't hog the buss or eat CPU cycles like the ATI and Nvidia cards do. If you pick up an AMD Sempron + motherboard combo deal at Frys (www.outpost.com on the net) which they run all the time and some value ram you can see how low the costs are to do multiple cheapo boxes for a sampled instruments farm.

For the software end, look at main apps that have great midi since mostly you will be orchestrating with midi instrument/samples and pro tools is not one of those apps.

As for the argument of being "pro tools compatible" just make sure you do your recording in your app as broadcast wave files, these are wave files that have time stamping and are easily brought into/converted to, any LA scoring stage's setup if your work ends up there.



.

[7om]

Originally Posted by SF_Guy

Any other recommendations?

I've got a Korby KAT as well as KM184's. Personally, I would discourage you from getting the KM184's. I bought a pair while looking for original KM84's. While the 84's are hard to find, it is not impossible. When you try them side by side with the 184's, there is simply no comparison. They (the KM84's) are just an exceptional SDC.

I am also beginning to consider selling my Korby. I mostly use the 251 and 67 capsules, but since I have had access to a real U67 for the past few months, I haven't used the Korby much. In fact, I even find that my U87's are seeing more tracking time than the Korby, and they are considerably less expensive, particularly if you can find a good one used.

I started out working with DP and Apogees, eventually expanding to include Pro Tools as well, so I have a good sense of the pros and cons of the system you are considering. Not sure if the SF in your name refers to San Francisco, Science Fiction or other, but if you are in the bay area and want to discuss a bit further, feel free to contact me.

Best,

Tom Rettig
http://rettig.megasonics.net/

[Greg Curtis]

My gawd, with all the time, money, and BS associated with getting farms of samples up and running on complex computer networks, why not hire some talented musicans to sit down for 3 hours and just play the damm parts?

[pramrod]

Originally Posted by Greg Curtis

My gawd, with all the time, money, and BS associated with getting farms of samples up and running on complex computer networks, why not hire some talented musicans to sit down for 3 hours and just play the damm parts?

because not everyone likes to compose music this way- i score the vast majority of my films playing all the instruments myself, usually late at night, with the studio as my instrument- be it real instruments like guitars, basses, drums, percs, effects, or synthesizers (analog and digital), sometimes emulating strings. even when i do bring in real string players, i rarely if ever write music on notation paper- i teach them the parts! so the whole argument of use real musicians instead of computers really breaks down when you start to think of the synths as a real instrument.
here's a good example for you- i recently scored an oscar nominated film. they had a fairly good budget and i was able to hire a top tier, triple scale cellist (and good friend) to come and play a bunch of cello parts for me. i also own a beautiful mellotron (a custom one from mellotron.com with a bunch of the remastered tape loops ) which i had played the vast majority of the cello parts on, just as roughs. i did a whole day of tracking cello parts on many major cues for the film with my friend the cellist. we got beautiful results. of course, you know where this story goes- the filmmakers chose almost entirely mellotron cello parts for the film and we barely used any of the great real cello parts. the tron won out almost every time! so often times the "modelled" instrument might even win out over the real thing. you may lament this fact, but it's reality- it's 2007 and the death of real instruments draws closer every day...
another factor in this is budget- filmscoring is pretty rough until you get to the top of the heap. many smaller films have ridiculously small budgets- so to make ANY money on these things (considering the time it takes to score a film and the level of BS you need to deal with with every filmmaker and producer) you need to play as much of the music yourself as possible. hiring musicians costs money, and so does hiring a studio to record them in. then there's scheduling, writing out parts, coordinating with the filmmakers and getting approvals, having players return to the studio to fix/change for the filmmakers, etc... so many of us turn to buying a bunch of gear and doing it ourselves (or if you are lucky to own the studio, like i do, this helps a lot!).
and then there's dealing with string players (could you breath a little quieter please...)... enjoy pram

[chrisso]

Originally Posted by Greg Curtis

why not hire some talented musicans to sit down for 3 hours and just play the damm parts?

Gotta agree with pramrod.
Film makers have gotten used to the endlessly tweakable, low cost score.
By the way, if the first run through of your rough mixes doesn't sound like the end result, directors seem to panic, lose confidence. I believe years ago composers presented their work in progress in piano form only.
Even if you are lucky to use several 'real' players, or an ensemble, directors will require many and large scale re-edits, or rewrites, right up to the final mix.
This has happened to me so many times, I just found it easier (if less enjoyable) to use midi instruments.
The top echelon of film composers are still able to work with real musicians......and they rough out their ideas using midi instruments and orchestral libraries.
However, due to low budgets and logistics, many tv composers in particular end up in the midi/sample realm only.
Budgets are tiny. I've regularly worked on projects that have been edited to music off CD. Then the composer is asked to match the quality.
Try scoring a film with a few 'talented musicians' that's been edited to Radiohead, Wagner, Steve Reich and Tom Waits. You'd need a massive budget.

[gsilbers]

Originally Posted by SF_Guy

I'm putting together a new composing studio (Film/Games). This is what I'm thinking:

Mac Pro
Logic Pro 7 (Do I dare say 8)
Apogee Symphony
" Rosetta 200
" Big Ben
Millennia HV-3
Great River MP-2NV
Korby Kat System
Neumann KM 184 (2)
UA LA-2A
UA 1176
TC Electronics 4000
Altiverb 6
UAD-1e
GigaStudio 3.0
Sample Libraries: VSL, BFD, Symphonic Choirs, Spectrasonics
Genelec 8050

Any other recommendations?

your list is really good. logic or DP is the way to go.
PT is used when you already export your basic tracks as submixes from logic/DP and its used in a pro studio where u can record overdubs or orchestras.

i didnt know cubase as reliable for film score but i changed my mind when i saw hanz zimmer and everyone in thier studio using it.

but besides DAW choice. i think you definitly need to have an extra computer for samples/vsts. i have a pretty fast mac and still i cant run all the stuff i would want to. well, its not about if it can handle a whole orchestra.. its about loading the damn orchestra inside the computer in the 1st place. you can have the 2nd pc ready for samples.

i have gone to lots of film score studios here in LA and everyone with a studio has more than 2 or 3 pcs for samples only, all connected to the main computer sequencer. for home stuff, just a second pc with a big HD will do.
oh, dont forget an extra HD for audio and another for samples. well, as soon u get the VSL then youll have no choice but to get another HD.

i would recomend having the East west stuff which is really good. the gold or platinum along side the VSL will make your sound expand a little mor.e

depending on the style of film scoring.. i would sugest checking out ableton live.
its great for adding/tweekin loop fxs. you can just grab from any sample loop library and tweekit and you can use it rewired to logic and create its own channels .
dont forget native instrument stuff. just get komplete 4.

[Solar]

As many have said it here, all your Gears list is GREAT!

Keep your Logic or DP or get any other mentioned Steinberg DAW, Sonar, REAPER and any other DAw (simply because Midi is far more advanced then PTools) to use for scoring and if u wanna be compatible, get yourself a little Hd or Le or M-powered Ptools system and u will be laughing thats all!

I myself got m-powered Pro Tools simply for compatibility in case a client came to me (as it is happening to me now) ask me if i got protools because he did session of PTools 6.9, i told him: No problem at all, i'm your man , bring the project here. The rest, i do them all in Nuendo, scoring, arranging, mixing 5,1 whatever you want & rock solid as all other DAW. Simply a question of Taste.

Good luck

[SF_Guy]

What a great response, thanks for all your recommendations!

I currently use Logic Pro 7 and Gigastudio 3 on two different machines (Mac and PC). In the past I've used outside studios to record vocal tracks and live musicians. I've been doing more and more original songs for films and other projects so I figured I would invest in a good vocal chain in addition to updating my composing rig (especially since I just built a vocal booth in my studio).

Most of my scoring is orchestrated for a modern chamber ensemble (virtual). However, I do want my rig to be setup for a full symphonic orchestra (VSL).

Getting a whole bunch of mac minis sounds like a great idea. How exactly does that work? Do I need Logic open on every machine or just Kontakt? Does anyone know how many I'd need for the full VSL Library?

(SF does mean San Francisco)

[edham]

The quick answer to your logic question is - no. You won't need logic on each machine. Kontakt works or you can use a cheaper/lower overhead host such as V-stack or Bidule.

Here is the best forum for asking your questions in regards to everything dealing with orchestral sample libraries and such.

http://www.vi-control.net/forum/view...41de0ba9d4af34

Here is the site for a member of VSL's forum who was an early problem solver with setting up mac mini farms.
http://www.createfilmscores.net/?page_id=9

VSL's own forum is also a better source of info
http://www.vsl.co.at/en-us/69/128/33.vsl

[londontown]

you need to run giga on a seperate machine. Don't even think about it any other way, otherwise a) your logic sequences will take years to open on big stuff and b) the computer will grind to a crashing halt with the workload. If you have to have it on the same machine, do, but it's not great.

frankly though, you can probably mix into pt le, get a digi 002 or an mbox so you can print stereo mixes. Then if you need to you can print stereo stems, it'll take a bunch of passes, but you can do it, and produce a pt session which is really the only serious format in film/tv scoring for delivery now.

so the ideal small rig is

logic running sequencer
pc running giga - run its audio outputs back into logic if you like - cool thing is then you can record bits of midi as audio either to 'freeze' them to free up space in giga on bigger stuff, or to manipulate in interesting ways.
Then a stereo out of logic into the mbox or the digi002, monitor through LE as well. You can do your orchestral reverbs in giga with vst plugins (worth finding either a half decent plugin or perhaps one good outboard), do any audio or loops stuff in logic, and then mix it out. Run your picture in pt le (the dv toolkit is nice, but not vital). All you have to get is picture as quicktime file, (we use dv) and you can get a canopus box (I think it's the advc-110, it's cheap), plug it into any telly and select "play qt movie out of firewire port" in protools. Dead easy, means you can have the picture on any TV.

for giga pc's - visiondaw are popular. They configure everything correctly to maximise the pc's use, so they're a little pricier than buying the parts, but I've got five of these and they're pretty slick. They rarely crash, some of them never.
www.visiondaw.com (and I don't work for them, by the way!)

ps do not use any form of midi interface for the giga. Waste of time.
http://www.musiclab.com/products/rpl_info.htm
only thing a midi interface is useful for now is synths/hardware samplers, and perhaps sync stuff for printing stems.

Originally Posted by SF_Guy

What a great response, thanks for all your recommendations!

I currently use Logic Pro 7 and Gigastudio 3 on two different machines (Mac and PC). In the past I've used outside studios to record vocal tracks and live musicians. I've been doing more and more original songs for films and other projects so I figured I would invest in a good vocal chain in addition to updating my composing rig (especially since I just built a vocal booth in my studio).

Most of my scoring is orchestrated for a modern chamber ensemble (virtual). However, I do want my rig to be setup for a full symphonic orchestra (VSL).

Getting a whole bunch of mac minis sou