[Fmpro] Unions and samples vs. live

[James Ryan]

I recall a funny story that happened in NY back in the 80s when string
synths first came out.  The union wanted to challenge the use of synths to
replace string players.  They called in a couple of first string guys to
listen to a string synth.  They uniformly "testified" that the synth sounded
like crap and nothing at all like a string section.

Do I hear the sound of nails going into a coffin?  And then crickets.

No offical complaints about synths or samplers on sound tracks that I know
of after that.

On the other hand, there is a device that they are currently freaking out
about that worked its way into Broadway plays called the orchestra machine
or something like that.  It's apparently a sample player that can follow a
conductor and has the entire orchestra stored in it, I suppose, something
like the VSL or Philharmonik.  It needs a musician to drive it, but again,
apparently sounds real enough that it has garnered official protests from
the AFM.

James

:)


On 10/2/06 4:55 PM, "robertf-lists at theremin-saw.com"
<robertf-lists at theremin-saw.com> wrote:

> Howdy:
> 
> There have been two recent threads, one about sample libraries and one
> about the
> union.  I thought I'd combine the two threads by asking a question that blends
> them, and leads in a third direction :)
> 
> Since a lot of sampled instruments are used in scoring these days, does the
> union have any official position (when recording under a union
> contract) on the
> use of sampled instrument over a live union musician?  For instance if you're
> going to use sampled oboe for something instead of a live oboist.  Would
> oboists be up in arms in a union complaint?
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Robert Froehner
> 
> _______________________________________________
> The Film Music Pro List is sponsored by Film Music Magazine -
> http://www.filmmusicmag.com
> 
> To edit your list options or unsubscribe, visit:
> http://nxport.com/mailman/listinfo/fmpro