Very personal opinions on virtual instruments
Some build entire songs out of them, some shun them like they were the Devil. Here are my opinions on virtual instruments in general.
Virtual instruments have three major drawbacks in my book:
- They usually don’t sound like real instruments.
- Computer control is limiting.
- I often end up playing them a way they shouldn’t be played.
Software doesn’t sound like real instruments
I too was fooled to think that bass emulations sounded as good as the real deal when I read computer music magazines years ago. It’s so far from the truth I can’t even put words on it. And surely, bass should be one of the simpler instruments to emulate as for a lot of people it plays very basic parts. Guitars have never even been close, and drums are… ‘too pretty’ in lack of a better word.
There is a upside to this however for the few who dare take the step and use them for what they are and not emulations. Think about the early electric pianos that were made to emulate pianos (and are now emulated as well, think about the irony!), the drum machines and bass emulators that were supposed to put drummers and bass players out of business. These early emulations were so bad that they actually helped spawn new genres of music! People don’t use these drum machines as ‘drummers’, they use them for what they are - drum machines, and they are almost more common to hear on todays radio than real drums.
I like to think that I see past instruments themselves and view the result of what’s being created by them instead - which are sounds. A sound has a character, but in itself it’s neither good nor bad. It simply is. I’m not afraid to say that I don’t always mic guitar amps. I usually do, but not always. Instead I sometimes line it straight into the computer and put Vintage Amp Room, Metal Amp Room or whatever on it. Not really to emulate a Marshall or some other boring amp, but just with the intention to alter the sound. See what I mean? Sometimes I just put Sansamp or Ohmicide on it. Pray tell, why is it that guitars absolutely must run through a speaker? And why must it be just that damn Marshall? It’s just a sound.
Computer control is limiting
It really should be the other way around, shouldn’t it? And it would almost seem like it is. Well, in a way it actually is. Software instruments have much more potential than any hardware instrument I’ve ever came across. What computer controlled instruments limits are creativity. Turning virtual knobs is incredibly destructive: it takes more time, it gives more focus to eyes than it should, it’s many times harder to find the right control, it causes RSI to name a few things. Another thing devastating for creativity is that not only do you need to load the software instrument itself, you also need to load the DAW and the computer! Couple that with that most MIDI controllers are bound to break and are of very low quality compared to proper instrument keys.
Yes, controllers, shouldn’t they be able to help us? They do, but we still have a long way to go. Digidesign and the AIR team make efforts in making controlling instruments easier, but I’m sorry to say that MIDI learn doesn’t fully compensate even with a lot of knobs and sliders at my disposal. This - and not sound - coupled with the whole ‘takes time to load’ thing mentioned above are actually the main reasons as to why I’ve pretty much left the world of virtual instruments altogether.
Playing them like I shouldn’t
What on earth does this mean? Think about it, do you play on keys like a trumpet player plays a trumpet? Do you play your bass the way you play your piano? I don’t, if I did I would only need one instrument. To me this results in pretty unrealistic compositions.
It has an upside to it however, the upside is the same as the downside: it results in pretty unrealistic compositions, which could mean innovation. If you read up on music history you will see how musicians tried to emulate other instruments to create something new and exciting. For instance, both the ‘boom chic’ bass on ragtime guitar and the ‘boogie bass’ (the shuffle) were attempts to play piano on the guitar. The modern lead guitar solos definitely have a lot from instruments such as the trumpet and the sax. Unfortunately, since everybody plays all the instruments on keys it will just end up sounding like every instrument is played on keys.
Soft synths
Soft synths should be discussed separately in my opinion. This field was covered by emulations and other un-innovate crap for years. I’m glad to say that recent years have seen a general move towards new synths instead of emulations. If I were to buy a soft synth I would most definitely buy something that isn’t a copy, and if I wasn’t dead serious in keeping my studio on a laptop or ITB I would buy mainly hardware synths.
I think the most intriguing aspect of working with software is to use programs, effects and synths that has no analog counterpart. The FX world have seen this, perhaps most notably in Ohm Force’s wicked creations, but also in a way with more traditional FX and processors such as Flux’s dynamic products. When it comes to synths VirSyn has made some innovative leaps and have made synths that can do things no hardware synth does. My personal favorite is by far Digidesigns Hybrid. It’s not as innovative as some other synths, but it wins hands down in pure sound quality against pretty much everything I’ve heard. On one hand Hybrid kind of ruined it for me, because after using it more and more I removed most of my other virtual instruments (and all soft synths) because they sounded way too wimpy compared to it.
It begs the question. Who’s emulating who? For most of the past quarter century drummers have been learning to copy the creations of programmers. In the 80s records like Herbie Hancock’s “Rokkit” had machine kick drums hammering out repeated metronomic 16th notes. It sounded excitingly inhuman, but soon great drummers like Keith LeBlanc proved humans could do it too. Since then drummers have learned to imitate looping breakbeats, superfast drum’n'bass rhythms and so on. The innovations mostly happened in the programmed, virtual world, and were later transferred to the world of flesh and blood.
I’ve noticed another recent example of this process at work: string orchestras. For understandable financial reasons, composers and arrangers make the best demos they’re capable of using, for instance the VSL orchestral library. I use VSL myself. Inevitably, when using these virtual instruments, you tend to flaunt whatever the VI does well, and stay away from what it does not so well. And with VSL it’s the legato patches, especially the “portamento” mode, which stand out. Overused it makes everything sound like “fake Bollywood”. But even without that, you often wind up with an entire cue played as if with a single bow stroke - which is technically impossible for human violinists. But I’ve noticed that big-time Hollywood orchestras are starting to emulate the VSL patches. They’re probably playing along with the VSL patches in the recording, so inevitably they have to find ways to adapt.
Interesting.
By Guy Sigsworth ~ August 30, 2008 kl 3:33 am
In my work, the most important characteristic is that the music feels tactile and present. This can be achieved a number of different ways and I’m not so concerned with process as I am with result. Ultimately, the only thing that matters is emotional impact.
Does the music cast a spell or not?
The song should pick you up in its talons and transport you to somewhere new. Anything less is a failure.
How this is achieved… well, with the myriad of options, both ancient/physical and technological/virtual, I think the only thing that matters is what comes out of the speakers. If it feels real it is real.
My favorite drum track of the last couple of years was Gorillaz “Feel Good, Inc.” and that has nothing to do with reality. Nobody has any illusion that it’s anything but MPC-style hip-hop boom bap. And do the 3 million people who bought Gorillaz fans picture a “real band” playing when they listen to that music? Or do they, more likely, visualize the cartoons? It’s an Andy Warhol world we live in.
That being said, when you hear someone (Ringo? John?) shout “I got blisters on me fingers” at the end of Helter Skelter, it tells you something about the feelings in the room, the effort it took to make the music, the joy (or is it misery?!?) of the process. It’s a key part of the song, that moment. It’s an important fact to note: how great that moment is.
Don’t lose sight of that ideal.
- c
By Chad Clark ~ August 30, 2008 kl 2:29 pm
“The song should pick you up in its talons and transport you to somewhere new. Anything less is a failure.”
I second that emotion. Wherever the opposite of earthbound is, that’s where I want music to take me.
By Guy Sigsworth ~ August 30, 2008 kl 3:00 pm
Very interesting twist Guy
And good points Chad.
By stiff ~ September 7, 2008 kl 12:31 pm
Im currently using hybrid my self YEEPPEE!
By Ostrange ~ September 14, 2008 kl 3:59 pm