Composing : Is live orchestral music still appreciated by directors/producers/audience? by Johannes Kern

No is the short answer to all of that. only 1 hollywood studio still has their own orchestra, out of the hundreds there used to be just 20 years ago. Technology changes, and the industry must change with it. Though live orchestra still produces a more moving sound imo. It's not just the expense, it's inefficient and lengthy, difficult to rescore and involving to mix and edit, much easier just to push a few buttons and have it all there and then. Unless you're going full blast on a massive live score, it's just not worth it, we have to be practical and prudent in the interests of the film.

Ideally, I would like to provide draft compositions using samples, (which can be pretty good but they're still a long way from totally convincing) then record a real orchestra once everything is finalised. But it's budget, a real orchestral recording is pretty expensive. The main downfall is that it limits your compositional scope; I would never use fast-legato cello parts with my software because they sound terrible, but stoccato strings and simple brass chords sound very realistic.

I don't agree with you Matt - it's absolutely worth, especially on a score with less instruments it can make the difference. On a big massive approach you will need lots of layering and mixing anyway... and I wasn't talking about studios having their own orchestra, but just using one for their film.

Very nice to hear Jim that you keep your musician friends close to your side. Oh yeah, I know that there is a lot of VI's out there - sometimes it has to be, but there is a difference between sampled instruments or synth instruments like Omnisphere, U-he, ... - the one side could be recorded by live musicians, the other side not. ;-) But I got the point you're talking about. Just turn on TV and listen to some sample music. Samples can be good as well, but nowadays they are overused that's why the big composers mostly have their own sampled orchestra.

how about letting the composer pay rent, if anyone should profit from writing music, it's the composer, i've had to work for free for years. It is a difference of opinion, and my opinion is that the composer's personal tastes in music and performance, should never be put ahead of the film or the interests of the filmmaker. When you're working to a tight schedule and have just a handful of hours to produce 45 minutes of music with full orchestra and choir, there simply isn't the time or budget to waste arranging and orchestrating, rehearsing, recording and editing, regardless of how wonderful you think it might sound. Where appropriate you use live musicians, but if you can achieve a higher quality and a faster better result by other means in order to meet the requirements of the film and its schedule, it has to be done and that has to take priority. I would never delay a production because i wanted the music to be more perfect, i couldn't do that to the director. you get it right, first time, by the best means possible, on budget and on time.

Ok, yes - of course if you're jumping in for a fast to deliver production I'm at your side. But if there is enough room I would really ask the producer to put some money aside to have a live musician on board - imho. :-) This changes from project to project - there are score with electronic synth sounds only and they're perfectly matching the film.

I sense that the agreement is: when appropriate for the film, it is best to offer the director and producers the opportunity to have live players. We should present the options: various layerings of live players, from a single soloist to whole sections, etc., and include the budgets and timelines that would go with them. It would also help to provide the director and producers examples of both sampled score productions of a similar style, and live scores, so they can sense what they are getting for their additional investment (assuming they are not already familiar). If they simply do not have the budget, then they know that this, just like every other aspect of their film production, will suffer to some degree for lack of that blank check which would make the ideal film possible. But if they do have the budget, and are convinced of the payoff for that investment, they will probably go for it. The film, the industry, and everyone will be better off for it.

Well I just heard the soundtrack To The Book Thief, by John Williams, and that made me excited to go and see the movie. Music makes a movie; b i g g e r

My Friend Mark Isham (BATMAN composer, and so many more features..) still uses a live orchestra. There is no comparison with sampling, depending on how the soundtrack is reproduced in a theater or at home. You can get away with it for 'Webisodes', as the picture and sound are compressed heavily when transcoding to H.264 formats, and there is no budget for an orchestra, but feature films have a unique requirement. Imagine listening to a compressed .mp3 (example: Apple iPod file), track in an IMAX theatre? It would be a disaster.

I will gladly provide any file format to any director, whatever they find easiest to work with and handle. And i make sure there is no difference in quality, it's my music and their film.

Simple answer: Just look at the top, say 10 or 20 films, are they using real orchestras? I'm guessing, and I feel it's a safe bet, 80% of those films are using real orchestras; maybe in another country, but real.