Anyone Doing String Arrangements?

[jerdude]

i'm curious what the going rate is for guys doing string arrangements using the available libraries... East West, Garriton, etc. obviously arrangements for conducted orchestra is much higher.

Anyone care to spill the beans?

[jerdude]

no one?

[synthdogg]

Originally Posted by jerdude

i'm curious what the going rate is for guys doing string arrangements using the available libraries... East West, Garriton, etc. obviously arrangements for conducted orchestra is much higher.

Anyone care to spill the beans?

I'm not really clear on what you're asking.....are you looking for someone to write a string arrangement that you can then "perform" and record yourself using sample libraries? Or are you looking for someone to add strings to your track using their own libraries?

(or is the answer..."whatever's cheaper?")

[whinecellar]

I doubt you'll find consistent rates for such a thing. In my market (Nashvegas), there are VERY few people that do this kind of thing, let alone with decent results.

Like anything else, rates will depend on your level of skill & success. I've found myself very busy in the last few years doing "virtual strings" - certainly for indie artists with less-than-major budgets, but also for major national/international artists. Not to mention scoring films, trailers, etc. in the sample realm. Accordingly, I get paid well as it's very painstaking work to get samples to sound remotely "real." And while I charge appropriately for this kind of work, it's a FRACTION of the cost of hiring a large section.

I'm also very careful to say that if you can afford the real deal, go for it. The sad reality, however, is that very few people can afford to hire a 60-piece section of top-notch players in a top-notch room with a top-notch engineer ;-)

One final note. I was concerned early on that the proliferation of all these amazing sound libraries would "level the playing field" and let anyone sound like their favorite film score. Not to worry, as it turns out: it just sounds like a lot of dudes playing great samples on a keyboard. Great sounds do not a great performance make!

Anyway, to answer your question, PM me and I'll be glad to give you some examples. As a general rule, you get what you pay for. I know that's vague, but in a forum like this you're dealing with folks from all over the place, and rates can vary widely by market. Don't want to step on anyone's toes!

If you can be more specific with examples here, I might be willing to give you some meaningful numbers...

Take care,

Jim

[spacecho]

Interesting thread,

Hey Jim, what sample libraries are you using at the moment, and what do you think are the better string libraries?

I have been doing a bit of orchestration with university orchestras but as you mentioned it can be pretty hard logistically and cost wise to get an orchestra... i've got a project coming up and i wouldn't mind investing in a new library.

Sorry to steal the thread....

harry

[siloo]

I'm a little troubled by your original question...

"i'm curious what the going rate is for guys doing string arrangements using the available libraries..."

String arranging is a completely independent discipline from clever programming with software, which your question unintentionally implies. So they should be be priced as two separate services. Having said that, a lot of us who do orchestration as one of the services we provide have also become quite adept at programming our arrangements using the latest and greatest libraries that are commercially available. This has come about in large part due to shrinking budgets in the recording industry as a whole. Ideally, one or two top-notch live players are brought in to further enhance the "virtual orchestra". As to your question about rates, well that will vary greatly based on several factors. One being experience and resume. Another being the extent of the material and the scale of the arrangement. In other words, do you need only strings or a complete symphonic arrangement, or something "in between".

As far as libraries are concerned, there are several that I own and will choose according to the overall sound or vibe of the source material. I like the Garritan Orchestral Strings for some things. I also like the Sonic Implants stuff for other things. The Vienna library, I would have to say, is my overall favorite. But the budget would dictate whether I could afford to spend the time working with such a large and involved library. However, the extra time involved is always worth it in the final product.

Just remember this- A well-written arrangement will sound better on a Korg Triton than a poorly-written arrangement programmed using the best libraries available.

At least, that's my $.02 worth 8-)

Please feel free to inquire about any of these aspects regarding orchestral arranging.

Jonathon A. Willis
Riverwind Productions
Spring Hill, TN
jwillis@charter.net

[elambo]

Originally Posted by siloo

I'm a little troubled by your original question...

...a lot of us who do orchestration as one of the services we provide have also become quite adept at programming our arrangements using the latest and greatest libraries that are commercially available.

What's so troubling? You provide the exact service he's asking for. Not only do you do it, but you're "quite adept at programming" arrangements. If you need to list your arranging as a separate line item than your programming, so be it, but I think he's asking for bottom line numbers.

For the record -- of all the string arrangers I know, all are familiar with and very good at programming virtual strings.

To the O.P. - I don't know the hourly rate, sorry.

[whinecellar]

Hey Guys,

Couldn't agree more with what Jonathon posted - well, all except his comment that a great arrangement would sound better on a Korg Triton ;-) (just giving him a hard time as he's a great friend & neighbor, but the spirit of that quote is certainly true).

Spacecho, to answer your question about libraries, there are lots of good ones out there. Much of it will come down to personal preference, budget, and the kind of material you tend to work on.

For me, the two top libraries I use daily are EastWest's Platinum Orchestra and VSL. I bought into EastWest back when Platinum was $4000 (then the XP expansion doubled that) - and I'd do it again in a heartbeat. It's great for that out-of-the-box Hollywood sound.

The VSL stuff is the perfect compliment because it's completely dry (whereas EW is mostly sampled wet), and VSL's legato stuff takes the realism factor over the top - it has allowed a level of expression I could never get anywhere else. Their Appassionata library in particular is the first I've ever heard that captures something similar to what you hear on a John Williams score. Warm, lush & "wooden" (as in lots of priceless old instruments all played at the same time). The downside to VSL is that it takes a lot of work to sound like what you're used to - you have to have a great verb and feel for placement.

There are lots of other great choices out there too. Heck, I still use many of Roland's ancient 700-series library for some stuff, and it sounds great in context (their con sordino samples still get a lot of use).

Again, as Jonathon alluded to, it's more than just having great samples. It's like having a Ferrari in the driveway - you gotta know how to drive it. Personally, I use a lot of tricks to add to the illusion: custom string samples that nobody else has, samples of room noise (40+ open mics in a room similar to Abbey Road), analog summing, etc.

Anyway, hope this answers some questions! - feel free to ask more.

Jim

[elambo]

EWQLSO is much easier to program / VSL can be difficult. EW won't give you the same realism for this reason / VSL will, if you take the time to do it right.

[synthdogg]

Originally Posted by siloo

I'm a little troubled by your original question...

"i'm curious what the going rate is for guys doing string arrangements using the available libraries..."

String arranging is a completely independent discipline from clever programming with software, which your question unintentionally implies. So they should be be priced as two separate services. Having said that, a lot of us who do orchestration as one of the services we provide have also become quite adept at programming our arrangements using the latest and greatest libraries that are commercially available. This has come about in large part due to shrinking budgets in the recording industry as a whole. Ideally, one or two top-notch live players are brought in to further enhance the "virtual orchestra". As to your question about rates, well that will vary greatly based on several factors. One being experience and resume. Another being the extent of the material and the scale of the arrangement. In other words, do you need only strings or a complete symphonic arrangement, or something "in between".

As far as libraries are concerned, there are several that I own and will choose according to the overall sound or vibe of the source material. I like the Garritan Orchestral Strings for some things. I also like the Sonic Implants stuff for other things. The Vienna library, I would have to say, is my overall favorite. But the budget would dictate whether I could afford to spend the time working with such a large and involved library. However, the extra time involved is always worth it in the final product.

Just remember this- A well-written arrangement will sound better on a Korg Triton than a poorly-written arrangement programmed using the best libraries available.

At least, that's my $.02 worth 8-)

Please feel free to inquire about any of these aspects regarding orchestral arranging.

Jonathon A. Willis
Riverwind Productions
Spring Hill, TN
jwillis@charter.net

Very well put, which is why I asked for the clarifier in my other post. I couldn't really tell if the OP is looking for "arrangements" or "finished tracks".

Personally, I have a price for a string arrangement itself (and it varies depending on the intensity of the arrangement), and then a separate charge for doing a mock up section.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm not too crazy about doing "fake" string sessions. It's a lot of time and effort to get it to sound remotely realistic, and I charge for that time. The problem is that an artist/producer is usually asking for "fake" strings because they want to get it done on the cheap, and it isn't really THAT much cheaper for me to mock up a section, layering multiple samples and going back and editing articulations and expressions (it's pretty tedious). I can usually bring in a trio or quartet and just track them a few times and have it done WAY faster, less headache, sounding a million times better....and it's not THAT much more expensive.

Now, for mid-sized budgets I really enjoy recording a small string section and layering a sampled section behind it, but that's jumping to another price-bracket.

[whinecellar]

Originally Posted by synthdogg

I'm not too crazy about doing "fake" string sessions. It's a lot of time and effort to get it to sound remotely realistic, and I charge for that time.

...I can usually bring in a trio or quartet and just track them a few times and have it done WAY faster, less headache, sounding a million times better...

Same here, generally speaking. However, the exception is that the usual method of stacking a small section a few times will never sound the same as one large section playing in a purpose-built large room. That's the type of thing where the sample approach becomes more of a necessity for many/most budgets.

You're totally right, and I also try to make the point that for smaller sections, you might as well hire the real thing. Generally the smaller the section, the harder it is to pull off convincingly with samples, and if you want authenticity, you're going to pay for it one way or another.

That said, if you can find someone that really knows what they're doing with samples, it's simply stunning what you can pull off these days. That's the trick though - I don't hear many people doing it well.

As for ease of use, my experience has been that one library isn't "easier" than another - they all take work in some area. With EW, you get a very "Hollywood" sound by default (specifically well suited for big action stuff IMO), and everything is properly panned and has the right depth perspective as well. Plus, the ambience that you're "stuck" with is top-notch, and you can minimize it by using the close mics. It's also killer in surround. However, you are stuck with that hall, which obviously isn't ideal for certain things. All things considered, it's one of the easiest libraries to get great results with. I've done pop/rock strings for records, movie scores & trailers using this library heavily, and it's done very well for me.

The VSL stuff, again, is very warm and more classically oriented, but it's versatile enough to do anything. Its drawback is that you really need something like Altiverb to make it sound natural; you also need to have a knowledge of how to mix & place strings. So, more thought is involved. Learning the Vienna Player takes a bit of time too, but they provide excellent video tutorials. Once you do, nothing matches its flexibility and power. Again, YMMV.

Again, hope this helps!

Jim

[synthdogg]

Originally Posted by whinecellar

Same here, generally speaking. However, the exception is that the usual method of stacking a small section a few times will never sound the same as one large section playing in a purpose-built large room. That's the type of thing where the sample approach becomes more of a necessity for many/most budgets.

You're totally right, and I also try to make the point that for smaller sections, you might as well hire the real thing. Generally the smaller the section, the harder it is to pull off convincingly with samples, and if you want authenticity, you're going to pay for it one way or another.

\\Hey Jim....thanks for clarifying, you're absolutely right. Most of the string arranging I've been doing lately has been for smaller sections and I think I've got a bit of a one-track mind on it right now. I wasn't even thinking about large section stuff, where I use sample libraries all the time!

BTW....I remember you, man. I ran into you a few times while you were playing with Smitty (I was with SCC at the time). Glad to hear you're doing well!

Chris

[whinecellar]

Hey Chris! Good to hear from you. Yeah, I remember you too. Funny that the 3 most vocal responders on this thread are all Nashvegas types ;-)

Yeah, same here - 1 track mind. All I've been doing is "big" score-type stuff, so that's where my head has been. I've done a good bit of smaller ensemble-type arrangements for records, and that's certainly more difficult to pull off convincingly. You're so right - might as well just get the real thing and save yourself the carpal tunnel syndrome from all the controller editing!

Anyway, good to see you here.

All the best,

Jim

[jerdude]

I'm a little troubled by your original question...

"i'm curious what the going rate is for guys doing string arrangements using the available libraries..."

String arranging is a completely independent discipline from clever programming with software, which your question unintentionally implies. So they should be be priced as two separate services. Having said that, a lot of us who do orchestration as one of the services we provide have also become quite adept at programming our arrangements using the latest and greatest libraries that are commercially available.

yeah not sure why thats troubling. but to clarify.... obviously, your not worried about proper notation for a real string section/conductor when your using midi. secondly, you're never gonna get samples to sound close to the real thing unless you know how to voice the sections anyway... as you would for arranging for a real section. thirdly, you're never going to get the samples close unless you can do #2 AND can be pretty clever with midi programming... control changes etc. a rather deep knowledge of the samplers themselves (kontakt, giga, halion, etc...) is also very necessary... as you may need to tweak the sample programming to the get the blend you want or to get a specific part to speak accurately.

anyway... it was more of a curiousity question... as there is more at our fingertips with all kinds of intrument sample libraries than ever before... and it will continue to grow.

thanks for all the comments.

[popmann]

I went with a subset of VSL's library (Chamber&Solo strings fwiw). Frankly, it's great sounding but with a steep learning curve, IMO, to really reach it's potential.

EW has a great "big" sound...one that, honestly, where strings sit in pop music, you could do with older, cheaper alternatives...even hardware. Now, if you honestly WANT that huge section sound, it's pretty cool. I specifically wanted smaller section options--I'm perfectly happy with various Giga libs, Kurzweil and ROland soundsets for "big orchestra" variety--again, in the context of the pop stuff I do. The smaller, more intimate stuff just hasn't been done well, IMO, outside the VSL.

With a 4gb loaded PC I can get almost the full Solo&Chamber string sets loaded, sans contrabass (this is pop!) . My CPU is an old P4--at full load playing back it's not hitting 20%. Less than one instance of the new Waves GTR modeller. I have a dedicated sample drive. Just to give you an idea of the system it takes--you want RAM...lots of it. They've got a stand alone host that lets you turn an Xp64 server into a sort of "whole orchestra slave" machine. Beautiful--but, still too pricey for my blood. Loads 30gb of BUFFERS into RAM!!

It should also be mentioned--I'm talking "level 1" that I own, or "standard library" I think they call it on the box. They have an extended library that I'd love to have, but just can't fathom paying almost double the price already paid for...well, much more specific, special use articulations. If they'd set it up to where I can unlock articulation by articulation, on a pay as you go plan, I'd be there--there are a handful there, particularly on the Solo set that I have used during my trial and would be useful. But, not an extra $1200 useful. ;)

[MotifCity.Com]

Agreed: EWQL strings are easier to program but I can't stand the microscopic menus in Kontakt Player.

If you want some absolutely brilliant strings (to my ears anyways), but some older Miroslav libraries in Akai format and load them into Kontakt. You won't believe ensembles you can come up with.

mj

[elambo]

Originally Posted by synthdogg

I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm not too crazy about doing "fake" string sessions. It's a lot of time and effort to get it to sound remotely realistic...

This is where I'm having trouble with this thread. I've never felt that EW was difficult to work with in order to produce legitimate sounding string pieces. Very much the opposite. I was working on a 5.1 mix at Skywalker of an orchestral piece that I wrote and the engineers asked where I recorded everything. They seemed a bit surprised to find out that the entire piece was samples. EastWest. It didn't take much mixing to get them to work - it was primarily due to the planning of the arrangement and putting forth the time to tweak them until the MIDI tracks are performed correctly. But IMO it's much more than remotely realistic right out of the box.

To the OP - if you're not comfortable programming this yourself, find someone to do it for you. Which I believe was your original question...?

[elambo]

Originally Posted by MotifCity.Com

If you want some absolutely brilliant strings (to my ears anyways), but some older Miroslav libraries in Akai format and load them into Kontakt. You won't believe ensembles you can come up with.

I have the full Miroslav set and didn't think it sounded nearly as rich and real as the newer libraries from EW and VSL. When it was new, Miro was incredible, but I feel like the bar has been lifted pretty far since then. To be fair, I haven't loaded the Miro library in quite a while, so don't take my word for it. I'm going by my impression of EW when I first started using it, prior to which I was using Miro exclusively (along with Roland strings and percussion).

[MotifCity.Com]

EW strings are drenched in reverb, and there is no way to desaturate them (at least in the Gold edition). The Miroslav stuff (solo instruments, ensembles, et al) is dry so I can put Waves IR on them and get an incredibly realistic arrangement. This is due in part to the extreme detail in the Miroslav samples.

As for Roland, I have the string/woodwind/brass collection. I ripped these right from the Roland format library CD's I got free once with a kjeyboard purchase back in the day (same ones you have?) with Kontakt. They are a bit hit and miss I'm afraid.

[whinecellar]

Originally Posted by elambo

...the entire piece was samples. EastWest. It didn't take much mixing to get them to work - it was primarily due to the planning of the arrangement and putting forth the time to tweak them until the MIDI tracks are performed correctly. But IMO it's much more than remotely realistic right out of the box.

I kinda thought that's what we were saying early on? Apologies for any confusion, so I'll reiterate. Regarding EW stuff specifically, I agree (and tried to communicate earlier) that the mix part of the equation kinda takes care of itself, or at least gives you a good head start: everything's panned and placed properly out of the box, and you also get 3 mic positions with Platinum (close, stage and hall).

So it's not the mix part of things (with that particular product) that takes all the effort: it's the editing & tweaking of the MIDI performances that takes it into "authentic" territory. That's true of ANY of the libraries though, so it's nice that the sonic part of the equation is taken care of, assuming you're after a big Hollywood-type sound.

With VSL on the other hand, you have some of the most expressive & capable samples ever created, but they're dry and beg for a skilled mixer and appropriate verb(s) to make them shine. And that's on top of excellent programming in the first place. Still, VSL is one of the best investments I've ever made.

So, maybe we're just dealing in semantics at this point. Whatever the case, I agree that given creativity and skills as an arranger, the results can be "much more than remotely realistic."

BTW elambo, did you enjoy working at Skywalker? I got to camp out there for a week a few years back, and it was by far the best recording experience of my career. I still can't believe how reasonable the rates were - cheaper than Ocean Way Nashville, killer room with variable acoustics (the scoring stage), awesome staff, and the list goes on...

Anyway, all the best!

Jim

[Energie]

I think its quite possible to get great results using Orchestral libraries. Are they perfect, nah, but you could probally fool most people.

I love writing for strings and orchestra parts, I think its easier to get emotion and dynamics then any other style of music. I mean strings and orchestral instruments are so dynamic and beautiful, can be powerful, yet soft, and you aren't having to search through thousands of synth sounds trying to find just what you need. I mean their are really only so many basic parts to orchetra.

I use East West and Sonivox Strings and some VSL currently. I find mixing and matching different libraries is a good idea. Good programming is of course key, and it takes a bit to learn how to get better realistic results.

for some small show and tell, here is an action trailer type track I just finished using EW and Sonnivox, It needs a bit more mixing and work, but just for kicks

http://www.energiestudios.com/Files/...tion%20cue.mp3

[Energie]

Originally Posted by MotifCity.Com

Agreed: EWQL strings are easier to program but I can't stand the microscopic menus in Kontakt Player.

If you want some absolutely brilliant strings (to my ears anyways), but some older Miroslav libraries in Akai format and load them into Kontakt. You won't believe ensembles you can come up with.

mj

You can use Kontact 2 or 3 if you want., plus they have a new player, Play.

[elambo]

Originally Posted by Energie

I think its quite possible to get great results using Orchestral libraries. Are they perfect, nah, but you could probally fool most people.

True. I've heard arrangements using VSL that would likely fool 99% of the population.

[elambo]

Jim - I think we were definitely agreeing that EW sounds great from the get-go, but I was responding to a statement about being "remotely" close only after putting in the time to make it so. This I disagree with. A solo cello line can sound legit in no time. A quick pizz bass and vlns piece will sound great without mixing. I don't think it takes too much time to get it there.

But yes, the point is simply that it's very "easy" to work with.

About Skywalker - it was great in every way. The staff was wonderful and polite and helpful and of course the rooms sounded great. I saw George and Leslie Ann and they even let me listen to the finished mix in the big Stag theater. I stayed in the Kirosawa apartment while I was there which is bigger than most residential apartments, certainly the ones I've lived in. First class all the way! I'm going again this year.

[synthdogg]

Originally Posted by elambo

Jim - I think we were definitely agreeing that EW sounds great from the get-go, but I was responding to a statement about being "remotely" close only after putting in the time to make it so. This I disagree with. A solo cello line can sound legit in no time. A quick pizz bass and vlns piece will sound great without mixing. I don't think it takes too much time to get it there.

But yes, the point is simply that it's very "easy" to work with.

Okay...I'm the "remotely" guy, and you're right. I may have made the phrase a little stronger than it needed to be.

One of the problems with this thread is that there's no context, though. The EW orchestra can sound AMAZING in some arrangements, and very fake in others....and a lot of the results fall on personal preference. When I made the comment about it being a lot of work to make the strings sound realistic, I was thinking about a few recent projects where I was working a string section into a pop mix, the section size changed throughout the song and there was a lot of dynamic movement and bowing changes. Now, I get the pleasure to work with real strings often...so I know in my head what I want it to sound like, and my comment earlier is that it takes a lot of effort to get the samples "remotely" into that area. So that was the context of the statement....and I agree that it's cetainly not always the case. Sorry if that was misleading.

[elambo]

Originally Posted by synthdogg

The EW orchestra can sound AMAZING in some arrangements, and very fake in others....and a lot of the results fall on personal preference.

Personal preference does play a role, no doubt. Also, I think some of the fake arrangements feel that way to you because you're so close to and familiar with real players on real stages and you probably have very specific expectations. The bulk of the world, even fellow musicians, would be fooled much easier.

[Spec]

VSL and the plantinum EW are great and v. expensive as mentioned by other posters. the cost of full VSL extended strings - solos through to the hollywood must be about 4K!!! even a single VSL extended library must be about 2K.

the problem with EW is you have to buy the platinum series to get the dry mic position. without the dry mic it v.v. limited in terms of the context it can be convincingly used.

the garrtian personal orchestra is great value and useful as a compositional and midi mock-ups tool with sibelius or finale but hard to see it cutting it as a serious production tool. it is just too thin sounding and limited articualtions IMHO

if you are just looking at strings think about the kirk hunter string libraries. they run through K2 or K3 have loads and loads of articualtions and cover the entire string spectrum through solos to massive hollywood styles.

and KH full string library costs about 1/5 - 1/6 the cost of a single VSL extended library. the KH sound punches well above its price in terms of competitors. the recordings are v. dry and v. flexible and the legato bowing uses kirk hunter's own Kontakt scripting. the results are v. good.

IMHO the problem is that to make a string arrangement that is sophisticated in sound - especially small stuff - you need to blend multiple libraries. in that sense the KH strings are a great start and excellent adjunct to some of the other libraries mentioned above.

that said VSL is the industry standard if you have the $$$$.

spek

ps forgot to mention the strength of the KH strings is their playability via midi keyboard. in this sense maybe the most playable string libary on the market at any price.