Are super realistic samples necessary for video game music?

[YoungProdigy]

Hey, Young Prodigy here. One of the biggest critiques I get is that my songs lack realism. . I use Sampletank 3 SE and most of the samples are of acceptable quality. But even with decent samples; it's still hard to make certain instruments sound realistic. Take the saxophone for example. Even if I add a lot of velocity variation, portamento, vibrato and expression; it still ends up sounding fake. It's the same situation with guitars too.

 

Take something like this:

 

I could never achieve a sax sound anywhere near that with Sampletank 3 SE.

 

I realize there are realistic vsts dedicated to saxophone and guitar; but they are expensive and I can't afford them right now.

 

So back to my original question; are super realistic samples really necessary for video game music?

[timaeus222]

It depends on context and intention. If you're trying to imitate something realistic, you need to use realistic samples. If you plan to digitally process the realistic instruments in an electronic context, it's not as important that they sound realistic anymore. If you're trying to imitate something that sounds like the Final Fantasy Tactics soundtrack, which is not a realistic orchestral sound but is instead a retro one, then no, you don't need realistic samples---you'd need something like the sounds of the Roland SC-88, because that's pretty much what was used for many '90s orchestral game scores.

 

EDIT: to clarify, the Roland SC-88 example has emphasis on authenticity rather than realism.

[Nabeel Ansari]

Let's dissect the question while answering it, because I feel it's important to change your mindset before mulling over the answer. These answers are also according to personal philosophy and not professional advice, so they apply to questions of values in music, but not necessarily as a process for how to go about professionally doing music (those questions are answered by considerations of budget and time, and not always artistic ideals). I answer the question like this specifically because you're posing the question in response to your audience having issues with your realism (as opposed to your "client" having issues with your realism).

 

"Are super realistic samples really necessary for video game music?"
 

We can substitute "video game music" here for "music", because video game music is completely and totally equivalent to (a subset of) music and should be held to the same standard (because they are the same thing). Because we're not doing professional considerations, differences in medium between film, tv, games, etc. don't apply here.

 

"Are super realistic samples really necessary for music?"
 

This depends. Are we trying to use instruments in our music that are performed acoustically? If so, then yes. The purpose of super realistic virtual instruments is to emulate human performances with ease. The goal of making music is in general to sound organic and human, to sound like it was something expressed by real people at a real time and place. This doesn't apply to many electronic elements, but it does to some, and it certainly applies to all acoustic instruments. If it's a real instrument, and it is sequenced poorly, it sounds awful, and because we're culturally still accustomed to hearing what real performances are like, we do have lackluster reactions to fake performances.

 

That being said, are "super realistic samples really necessary"? No, but they make the job, your goal, easier. So let's try this one, then.

 

"Are realistic samples necessary for music?"

 

I'd say realistic samples are necessary for intuitive music composition even if super realistic ones are not. The distinction here is that super realistic samples are very expensive and have lots of features. However, skilled composer-producers can work with not so super realistic samples to still make them sound like organic performances. The requisite here is that the samples at least resemble the sound of their real-world counterpart ("realistic"). Even with less realistic samples, composers still manage to get great results, but that begins to cut into your composition flow, because you're spending more time MIDI programming than you are focusing on the music.

 

I consider intuitive workflow and minimal tinkering a necessity for music composition, so I hold that samples need at least a decent level of realism in order for me to put them in my music. Though, in actuality I always go for the biggest and best super realistic ones.

 

It depends on context. If you're trying to imitate something realistic, you need to use realistic samples. If you're trying to imitate something that sounds like the Final Fantasy Tactics soundtrack, which is not a realistic orchestral sound, then no, you don't need realistic samples---you'd need something like the sounds of the Roland SC-88, because that's pretty much what was used for many '90s orchestral game scores.

 

To clarify, my response is assuming you're writing music without the intention to explicitly sound fake in the realm of sound chips or dated production eras, so Timaeus's answer also holds.

[YoungProdigy]

 

Let's dissect the question while answering it, because I feel it's important to change your mindset before mulling over the answer. These answers are also according to personal philosophy and not professional advice, so they apply to questions of values in music, but not necessarily as a process for how to go about professionally doing music (those questions are answered by considerations of budget and time, and not always artistic ideals). I answer the question like this specifically because you're posing the question in response to your audience having issues with your realism (as opposed to your "client" having issues with your realism).

 

"Are super realistic samples really necessary for video game music?"

 

We can substitute "video game music" here for "music", because video game music is completely and totally equivalent to (a subset of) music and should be held to the same standard (because they are the same thing). Because we're not doing professional considerations, differences in medium between film, tv, games, etc. don't apply here.

 

"Are super realistic samples really necessary for music?"

 

This depends. Are we trying to use instruments in our music that are performed acoustically? If so, then yes. The purpose of super realistic virtual instruments is to emulate human performances with ease. The goal of making music is in general to sound organic and human, to sound like it was something expressed by real people at a real time and place. This doesn't apply to many electronic elements, but it does to some, and it certainly applies to all acoustic instruments. If it's a real instrument, and it is sequenced poorly, it sounds awful, and because we're culturally still accustomed to hearing what real performances are like, we do have lackluster reactions to fake performances.

 

That being said, are "super realistic samples really necessary"? No, but they make the job, your goal, easier. So let's try this one, then.

 

"Are realistic samples necessary for music?"

 

I'd say realistic samples are necessary for intuitive music composition even if super realistic ones are not. The distinction here is that super realistic samples are very expensive and have lots of features. However, skilled composer-producers can work with not so super realistic samples to still make them sound like organic performances. The requisite here is that the samples at least resemble the sound of their real-world counterpart ("realistic"). Even with less realistic samples, composers still manage to get great results, but that begins to cut into your composition flow, because you're spending more time MIDI programming than you are focusing on the music.

 

I consider intuitive workflow and minimal tinkering a necessity for music composition, so I hold that samples need at least a decent level of realism in order for me to put them in my music. Though, in actuality I always go for the biggest and best super realistic ones.

 

 

To clarify, my response is assuming you're writing music without the intention to explicitly sound fake in the realm of sound chips or dated production eras, so Timaeus's answer also holds.

 

Well to answer the question of "Are we trying to use instruments in our music that are performed acoustically?" the answer would be yes. But in my experience; I've come to realize that without a dedicated VST for certain instruments, that realism can be very hard to achieve. For instance; a realistic jazzy smooth saxophone like in the song in that youtube link, would be almost impossible with just one multivelocity sample. Making realistic guitar parts from just one sample is also difficult.

 

And I agree with you that super realistic samples are expensive. I could probably get a realistic sax sound from "Mr Sax T", but that's around $164. I would say my current samples do resemble the instruments; but you can still tell they're fake. Especially when it comes to guitars and saxes. It's less of a problem with multi-articulation instruments though. But I have another question. Could I truly make something similar to the sax in that video, with just programming? And could I truly make a convincing guitar solo with a single articulation sample?

[Nabeel Ansari]

It's not really even possible to get a performance like that with super realistic samples. That's a real saxophone player you're hearing, doing that style of all things. Technology isn't there yet.

 

You don't need that level of expression to get a "realistic" sax. As in, you can be realistic with a saxophone sample, just not THAT realistic.

[timaeus222]

And I agree with you that super realistic samples are expensive. I could probably get a realistic sax sound from "Mr Sax T", but that's around $164. I would say my current samples do resemble the instruments; but you can still tell they're fake. Especially when it comes to guitars and saxes. It's less of a problem with multi-articulation instruments though. But I have another question. Could I truly make something similar to the sax in that video, with just programming? And could I truly make a convincing guitar solo with a single articulation sample?

At some point you have to realize where your samples have their limits. Sometimes a particular performance is too difficult to emulate precisely, so maybe you're, let's say, 90% there, and that may sound like a realistic-enough, yet slightly different performance.

 

For example, I recreated the first solo for Bohemian Rhapsody two years ago. It still holds up pretty well today IMO, but it sounds like a different performance when you compare it to the original (besides the tone of the guitar and the obvious lack of vocals in mine). I think mine sounds a little too perfect, specifically in how the notes connect on the ascending scales, for example.

[SnappleMan]

I feel like someone who calls themselves YoungProdigy should not need such assistance. 

[AngelCityOutlaw]

I feel like someone who calls themselves YoungProdigy should not need such assistance. 

 

"I'm not going to actually contribute anything of value to the thread, but allow me to make a snide remark regarding your arbitrary username."

[SnappleMan]

Hell yeah

[AngelCityOutlaw]

Hell yeah

 

I like your style, but it's a shame in this case since you generally provide sound music advice.

[YoungProdigy]

At some point you have to realize where your samples have their limits. Sometimes a particular performance is too difficult to emulate precisely, so maybe you're, let's say, 90% there, and that may sound like a realistic-enough, yet slightly different performance.

 

For example, I recreated the first solo for Bohemian Rhapsody two years ago. It still holds up pretty well today IMO, but it sounds like a different performance when you compare it to the original (besides the tone of the guitar and the obvious lack of vocals in mine). I think mine sounds a little too perfect, specifically in how the notes connect on the ascending scales, for example.

Yes I agree with you that some samples just have their limits.

 

In cases like those; should I even shoot for realism or just try to make the instrument 80-90% realistic?

[AngelCityOutlaw]

Yes I agree with you that some samples just have their limits.

 

In cases like those; should I even shoot for realism or just try to make the instrument 80-90% realistic?

 

80 - 90% realistic is the best you can ever do with samples anyway.

[MindWanderer]

Just bear in mind that what sounds 80-90% realistic to you may sound 40-50% realistic to an expert ear.

[SnappleMan]

It's very simple; you will never fool the people you're trying to fool. Most people who hear music don't question the realism of your samples or anything silly like that, they just listen for things they like. The people who you want to fool are the ones who will always notice. Just make things sound good without trying to make them sound "real" and you'll end up making much better music.

[AngelCityOutlaw]

It's very simple; you will never fool the people you're trying to fool. Most people who hear music don't question the realism of your samples or anything silly like that, they just listen for things they like. The people who you want to fool are the ones who will always notice. Just make things sound good without trying to make them sound "real" and you'll end up making much better music.

 

[timaeus222]

Yes I agree with you that some samples just have their limits.

 

In cases like those; should I even shoot for realism or just try to make the instrument 80-90% realistic?

With organic samples that allow you to do something "ultra-realistic", once you learn how to use them inside and out, the goal I would put out is to well-sequence a plausible performance. If the samples are good but still missing a few non-crucial features (like for example, an electric lead guitar library without the capacity for power chord slides, or a violin library that doesn't have pizzicato... that isn't the end of the world), you can still sequence a performance that does not involve a feature you don't have. That performance could potentially still be realistic; it'll just be less comprehensive as to what techniques are used.

 

If the library is missing a crucial feature though (like no hammer-ons and pull-offs for a electric lead guitar library, or no slurs for a violin library---TRAVESTY I SAY!), keep browsing your options.

 

In any case, for VGM, "super realistic" samples would be nice, but it's not always necessary. Like Snaps said, if it "sounds good", it's good to go. For example, obviously the Plants Vs. Zombies soundtrack uses a few orchestral instruments in an old-school, electronic-orchestral soundscape, and they're not realistic by a long shot. Yet, Laura Shigihara went with that for the soundtrack, and I personally love the soundtrack because I think the quality of the instruments exhibits a memorable "character" to the PvZ soundscape.

[Nabeel Ansari]

(like no hammer-ons and pull-offs for a electric lead guitar library, or no slurs for a violin library---TRAVESTY I SAY!)

 

I wish I could prepare you for the massive sadness that is incoming to you. In a couple weeks you'll see what I'm talking about. xP

[AngelCityOutlaw]

Like Snaps said, if it "sounds good", it's good to go. For example, obviously the Plants Vs. Zombies soundtrack uses a few orchestral instruments in an old-school, electronic-orchestral soundscape, and they're not realistic by a long shot. Yet, Laura Shigihara went with that for the soundtrack, and I personally love the soundtrack because I think the quality of the instruments exhibits a memorable "character" to the PvZ soundscape.

 

Swear to Dio, I quoted Snappleman's post saying just that from a few years ago in another thread and if I recall correctly, you disagreed and argued it. Now you agree with it and add that despite the less realistic samples of PvZ, you enjoy the music anyway - which I said that less realism wasn't really a strike against the track and context is malleable and if that context is malleable than you should be able to enjoy regardless of realism and you sa-

 

You know what? Fuck it.

 

I wish I could prepare you for the massive sadness that is incoming to you. In a couple weeks you'll see what I'm talking about. xP

 

The battle rages on.

[Moseph]

Composers, like CG artists, face the uncanny valley when attempting to simulate realism. Things that are heavily stylized and/or clearly fake are often less off-putting than things that strive for realism but only partially achieve it.

 

How far it's worth pursuing simulated realism -- assuming your work isn't dictated by a client's needs -- is a question of the extent to which you view the pursuit of realism as an artistic goal in itself. Personally, I'm fascinated by the pursuit of a technically unachievable goal, I'm interested in the technology driving that pursuit, I enjoy the challenge, and I think that grappling with the musical and philosophical issues raised by simulated realism has made me a better musician, or at very least a better listener and audio-editor. (Helps, of course, that I also have enough disposable income to overcome a lot of the cost barriers.)

 

Your mileage may vary, of course.

[timaeus222]

Swear to Dio, I quoted Snappleman's post saying just that from a few years ago in another thread and if I recall correctly, you disagreed and argued it. Now you agree with it and add that despite the less realistic samples of PvZ, you enjoy the music anyway - which I said that less realism wasn't really a strike against the track and context is malleable and if that context is malleable than you should be able to enjoy regardless of realism and you sa-

 

You know what? Fuck it.

 

People learn, and you know what, that's what I'd say today.

[SnappleMan]

Also when you think about realism you have to take into account many factors. These days we have samples that are just as "real" as a live performance because they are snippets of live performances. Modern complex legato scripts use performance samples instead of traditional one shot samples, that means that when you play a legato slur from C to E the script plays a sample that's a legato phrase going from C to E that's (badly in most cases) crossfaded and tempo matched to fit the context of the surrounding notes and meter. You have something like Prominy V-Metal which is a completely sampled guitar and can sound close to 90% convincing, but when you hear most people use it, it sounds like fake ass.

 

The fidelity and playability of a sample is just one part of it. Now we have tons of realistic samples that are relatively easy to acquire for anyone (us professionals who can write this stuff off on our taxes and the younger kids who torrent) but the music isn't really getting that much more realistic. Professionals who used gigasamples in 2004 still made more realistic sounding music than amateurs of today with a complete VSL library. It's all down to knowing how to correctly write parts for instruments and performing/recording as much as you can on your own. If you have one live recording among 30 tracks of samples, it'll make your entire performance jump out and sound great.

 

Also keep in mind that there are millions of musicians vs maybe a couple dozen libraries for each instrument. That means that as soon as someone recognizes a sample you're using your entire game falls apart. Think about layering different samples together and filling in the gaps where each library falls short.  Match your reverbs as best you can, build competent ensembles that mask each others shortcomings and most importantly learn at least one melodic "lead" instrument (whether it's guitar, violin/viola, trumpet, flute, clarinet etc) so you can put a layer of something live on top to tie things together. Piano doesn't count as it's percussive but everything I'm saying really starts applying to you after you learn the piano to a moderate degree.

 

tl;dr the best quality samples will never make up for poor performance, poor composition, poor musicianship, poor arrangement, poor voice leading, poor harmony, etc. Become a performing musician first (it's not hard at all to spend 3-6 hours a day practicing piano for a year, trust me you'll be awesome at the end of that year) and then you will have a better feel for music as a whole and will be able to use samples more properly.

[Moseph]

So, the Samplemodeling alto sax can get reasonably close to the sax in that Megaman video. Takes a bit of work, obviously.

 

Samplemodeling sax playing the video's sax line (in isolation)

Samplemodeling sax (on left) with the video's sax (on right)

 

EDIT:

And just for fun, here's the same thing played with the Cakewalk TTS-1, which is not multisampled. I believe the TTS-1 uses the same samples as the Roland SC-55 sound module.

 

Cakewalk TTS-1 playing the video's sax line (in isolation)