วีดีโอ

Very good walk through, thank you.

There is a stage during my composition when I tend to add divisi on NOT divisi patches. This video reminds me the importance of doing it correctly. So, thank you!

This video is helping me to learn how to use this software. Thanks so very much.

Hi what orchestra library did you use?

Easily explained. Thanks a lot

This is def using

Hey i subscribed thanx for the video thinking of buying this one i already bought the striings

Audio modeling desperately needs artificial intelligence to adapt vst settings like dynamics velocity etc to the real violin player model. Without this, it will never sound realistic. Humans are terrible at computer settings.

Thank you for this!!!

Which DAW are you using that makes those note velocity curves? ProTools doesn't do that.

Excellent.

Very nice sir!

Bravo! Holy Vivaldi!

Very nice work! Love how it’s a modern orchestral feel while the violin plays a more baroque era melody. You should do this type of thing more often!

Appassionato. I like it very much. I would put the choir even more up front!

Obviously very Barroque, with a twist of modernity! Love it very much!

Even 'though it's Opus' day, sometimes I like to go Bach to Play.

The V1 comparison sounds noticeably different to me. Samples may be the same; but it sounds like they've done some refinements under the hood. Essentials sounded more consistent and smooth in your example. Were you playing back a MIDI clip or playing live for both examples. That could explain the difference I'm hearing.

Awesome playing. The symphonic horn sounds the most realistic i.m.o

For that ending, if you wanted to go with a recipe anyway, you could have made the choir sing the actual song “Chocolate Salty Balls”… 😂

Thank you for this video, Sam. When this library showed up in my subscription I thought it looked cool, but I haven't found much use for it. You've given it a little more perspective for me. Also, great piece of music.

Thank you from France ! OK with Cakewalk by Bandlab. I have to select the clip before the operation.

Hi Sam, I bought a Double reeds and Clarinets from VWinds two days ago. So far I have found that playing the same note repetitively sounds really awful. I tried the double tonguing technique with the bassoon (without using the breath controller and piano, just my DAW). When the RR was off, it sounded like a "machine gun", with the RR on it soundedeven worse.. Do you think there is any way to fix this problem or is it just a limitation of the product?

Im thinking breath controller could also be useful for guitar vst hmmm

Can someone advise me how to import all the instruments into Logic like here? Nothing works and there is no 'midi import preferences' I can find.

Great stuff but I just can't find the midi import options etc. in the latest version of Logic :( Can anyone help? Thanks

Great Job! Very lovely video / comparison. Thanks for that!

Does it work reliably? Any quirks? Thanks.

I'm wondering if export midi works on Logic. Right now, I'm continuing to download Opus files. I've noted differences in volume between sus instruments and stacc instruments in the brass, so 'm looking for people who've had the same or other issues. I've read that Opus isn't exactly reliable in certain aspects.

What if i want only trumpet sound? Does it have any option like that?

How do you affect the velocity in such a crazy way. Do you have a special control keyboard?

Do they have a local distributor yet? Last time I checked, they did not. That would be kind of risky. What is their return policy? Last time I checked, it worked for them more than for the consumer.

Very useful, thanks. I'm just dowloading Opus now.

The Yamaha VL70-m is a physical modeling hardware device that sounds incredible with the Patchman Music TURBO upgrade installed.

Thank for that open-minded video! - I do understand the royalty argument, but at the same time I am struggling with it. After all, aren't we all going to the library, studying old scores and then more or less take away what we like? We do not take away anything it in a 1:1-manner (or maybe there are some, but that's not the point), but we actually do start thinking in e.g. Strawinski-like poly-tonality after hearing "Rite of Spring", or use metric modulations after learning about Elliott Carter, or dig into Musique Spectrale after learning about Gérard Grisey and Tristan Murail, etcetc. The outcome can be judged like many of us do with e.g. John Williams, where we like to say "that is Williams, but we can hear Prokofiev and Bruckner and Mahler andandand...". Isn't AI doin't the same? It learns from old scores (as we do), but outputs its own thing (as we do)? We do get royalties, when a piece of ours is performed, and so should a trained AI. - Or am I seeing the whole thing totally wrong? Happy to be educated to understand better! Thanks!

Shutterstock own Pond5. They’ve already made a statement about how they ‘shared’ their royalty free images for machine learning with some image AI developers. Musicians who’ve slaved away for peanuts who’ve uploaded to Pond5, beware, it’s coming. If it already hasn’t! Their artists won’t get paid for this.

I am sorry, but except legatos, you can do the same with Originals Epic Choir with a few tracks and effects. The price of this "small" library is 29 £€$ ( with syllabes ) not 599 crazy price ! The randomise is too complicated by definition, so not interesting for me. The important thing missing in Spitfire choirs libraries is singers breathing. How can it have been forgotten ? 😡😡😡

People are seriously overestimating their own creativity. I've yet to see somebody explain to me why Humans are so special that they can do something that AI can never match. And I am not talking about now, the statements are always "never", so what is the fundamental law of nature hat only they know about? We may or may not hit another wall in AI development like we did practically right after Eliza in the late 60s that will stump us for decades or we might not. But I see no reason why the statement that AI can never match a good Human would be true on a fundamental level. Until now AI was all Software but we are getting Hardware right now that is build for AI. We haven't yet seen what we can really do with our current processing technology in this field.

I think we need to figure out a way that ai created music that goes into the market no matter how it’s used needs to be stated ai or you get fined. Like how cigarettes have to put on their boxes the dangers of smoking cigarettes.

Great video! And definitely what we need to hear as composers! Progress is an important aspect of our lives and conservatism helps us keep that progress at healthier pace giving us (humanity) the time to assure any progress will bring benefits and better life to humanity and not only a few. Thank you Samuel!

@1:55 Actual tutorial starts here

The difference I see is that inventions are single function focused. A better potato peeler, something that keeps food cold. AI is not for a function, it can do multiple, many, not only functions but creation. An AI tool that helps remove noise would make life easier in a studio and maybe reduce the needs for studio producers for big demands, but AI creating can create the song from scratch, creates the marketing for said song, etc...

I find ai music kind of lame. There's already an abundance of music, why would we want to automate it with machines even further and take away most of the creative phase. It makes sense for corporations, sure. But for me as a solo dude making music for the sake of making music, I don't care for it at all. I make music for myself, to have fun and create audio snapshots of my mood at any given time. Ai doesn't affect people like me who aren't desperate to make money with their art.

Thanks for reminding people that AI companies are stealing copyrighted material without permission. I'm confident that the lawsuits and the work of the US copyright office will bring an end to this theft. Many claim "AI is here to stay", but I do think there will be sociological phenomenons at a play that will result in a great backlash eventually. AI is here to stay only if we allow it. Honestly I will never license my music for AI, and I think no smart label will do that either. Why licensing your catalogue if a team of very few people (e.g. Suno is just 12 guys) can build your own AI, so to gain money without generating your own competition? Why should you want to indeed compete with big tech companies, that will exploit your data far more than you can. Human society is complex, and it may be the fundamental obstacle to the development of AI for arts. I think that AI only makes sense for science or jobs that human cannot do. I don't give a damn about a robot composing a love song.

but... you can now just press a button and it will compose based on the professionals in its training data set.

People seem to prefer anything that's fake. Let em have it.

I have nothing against AI art as long as it is trained on legal datasets and not the copyrighted material. But I guarantee you, 99% of them are NOT ethical. This industry gets lawsuits left and right. Myself personally, I won't ever get as much enjoyment out of anything AI, because I know how those models generate what they do. It's just a bounch of real artist's sweat, blood and tears put into an algorythm without their approval or compensation, analyzed, dissected, and rearranged to best represent a prompt. These AI models are NOTHING without already existing art, created by people spending time and effort. Putting their soul into their craft. To put it simply, human made art is like making love to your beautiful wife, And AI art is like making love to a blow-up doll.

I think that AI (a very misleading name for what it actually is) being a replacement for human-made expression will, long-term, de-evolve human artistic ambition and ability in addition to devalue our overstimulated culture's appreciation of fine art even more than it already has. As you may very well guess, I am on the conservative side of the human equation. "AI" being leveraged to spit out endless mirco-variations of snapshot musical craftsmanship was an unnecessary and tasteless genie to let out of the bottle. Those claiming to "use" AI to become artists are not developing their skill, but outsourcing a wish. You can do the same thing already if you paid a human being to perform the task instead of visiting the Grand Automata. That's fine, if you approach music creation as would an old fashioned studio/director producer instead of a MUSIC producer (the business man/woman holding the checks and making the -risky- decisions). Sure, you can try to use AI to do tasks that you do not wish to perform (I do not like mastering, for instance, but I force myself to make the compromises I am never happy with). However, in this age of convenience, we have very little excuse to not 'level up' instead of outsource or collaborate. You cannot 'level up' unless you pursue your goal with time, intention and even sacrifice. I would not have learned to play physical instruments in some capacity if I did not have the drive to authentically hear them. There is such a thing as limiting your toolset to be more time-efficient but there is another notion known as a 'crutch' -- and wisdom is required to know the difference for each case. Perhaps playing physical instruments will be an integral "stamp" of near-future human musical expression. Personally, I love both synthesizers, orchestral sounds and guitars, and fortunately there is a way to play guitars and keyboard-operated synths in a physical manner. However, investing the time to create live performances of such comes at a great cost (especially to a very part time hobbyist with a day-job/family). Sharpening keyboard-playing and guitar-licks and competent levels requires continuous training, practice and can often stunt or eliminate your time to compose/mix music (In the past, I've often had to block-times to accomplish two separate goals in almost seasonal-variety). Time is the fire by which we burn. I have often wanted to be content with merely intermediate-guitar skills and focus more on producer/composing. However, in the shadow of this new paradigm shift, I am looking over the shoulder of my recent goals and wondering what is the most effective decision, if at all. Stock/background music is already hugely threatened as a marketplace of opportunity. Personally, I'm glad that I at least had one gig where I was commissioned to supply music for an indie-game. I feel disappointment for those who placed their eggs in that basket already. AI might never make better than “polished” music with brief pop structure. Complex music in the vein of the great composers over a century ago might never happen (even most of us fail to meet their stature). Sure, you can fake the mathematics of a canon or a fugue, but combining it with humanity is a feat only pure imagination can juggle. I have never heard anything remotely close to the completeness of a whole four movement symphony out of machine learning. It's still laughable when it attempts to (with the clickbait ideas such as supposedly "finishing Schubert's unfinished symphony" ... ... WITH the help of a human calling the shots of the melodic windchimes -- just read the fine print). I have never listened to any orchestral music auto-generated that moved me to inner tears or jubilee. Please don't take this previous paragraph as a pot-shot against the sincere craftsmanship of forms of music such as hip/hop beatsmithing, pop-tune or EDM tracks (gobs of which I do not hate). Yes, AI can spit back out endless variations due to the wealth of human-made examples fed into it's black hole. However, I cannot see a machine learning database crafting new genres that make sincere steps of innovation into new sounds and techniques. Therefore, I agree with your assessment of what is currently possible for AI to achieve. I cannot use AI nor do I wish to. I have music that I can hear in my head when I metaphorically close my eyes or focus deeply. No, I do not claim that my internal imagination is supremely innovative, but these internal ideas means enough to me that I cannot substitute the process with ANY form of outsourcing. There are other musicians who can imagine worlds of music without it existing externally. AI cannot make their dreams come true short of a cyberpunk cable jack to the brain. There is also the joy of sandboxing, which I'll save you from another paragraph in this already verbose wall of text. I have an odd knee-jerk fear of artists who have great works of music being fed to the database without their consent. This "AI" database has once been described as a soft form of identity theft by some visual artists that I've encountered. Those claiming the machine-learning-database is no different than a human being copying or quoting ideas in their endeavors are unwise.

sounds from a slumberland

Most hobby producers often just wanted a little appreciation after working on a song for weeks. This appreciation is now being taken away from them because “everyone” can do it. Will the young generation now invest in a hobby recording studio when AI will generate absolutely perfect tracks in just a few years? “Art and creativity” is the greatest asset humanity has - and it has now been handed over to AI. That was the first step in making ourselves superfluous. What should people study today that the AI ​​won't take over after they graduate? My dentist tells me that robots are already being developed to replace dentists' work. I hope the government has prepared for us all to receive social benefits soon.