New interview for VI Magazine
Feel free to read this lengthy interview I did for VI Magazine, which is the leading magazine for Virtual Instruments and new music technologies.
- – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – -
Composer Troels Folmann is a multi-award winning composer specializing in epic orchestration and modern electronica. Troels received world wide recognition when he won the english BAFTA award for his soundtrack Tomb Raider Legend. This title was subsequently awarded game music of the year at the Game Developers Conference (2007) in San Francisco, and Troels later received the highly prestigious TEC award in New York for his work as the composer and audio director for the series.
Can you tell us something about your background and influences?
I don’t really have a traditional musical background. But I am convinced that there is a genetic quality to my trade. I did not learn to speak before the age of six, which lead my granddad to conclude I was born retard, which is still a topic debated in the family. Ironically my granddad was the only person in my family with interest in music. He had the unfortunately hobby of building and playing violins … both very poorly. So I had all the premises of a great start.
So anyway … eventually I became autistically obsessed with video games. I would play games all day and not care for school, people or the two day old pizzas that became a substantial part of my daily nutrition. It was just about me, Spyhunter, chips and cola. I also fell in love with the music in the games. The majestic Commodore 64 composer, Rob Hubbard, was one of the leading sources of inspirations and I still clearly remember his themes for Commandos, Last V8, Knuckle Busters and Crazy Comet and over 50 of other his scores.
My obsession with game music did expand over time and started including film soundtracks too. I had a hard time understanding the cover letter of records, so I would sometimes get things that were non-intentional. One of them was Herbie Hancock’s Future-Shock album, which had these crazy laser things going on the cover, so I thought it was a motion picture score and then things just took off. This album redefined me together with E.T, Vangelis, Jan Hammer, Lee Ritenour, Trouble Funk, Chaka Khan, Sly and Robbie and Shostakovich.
Scrolling forward to the last five years my influences have changed dramatically. I still listen to a variety of composers, including Hans Zimmer, Howard Shore, Pat Metheny, Thomas Newman, Gabriel Yared, David Arnold, Herbie Hancock, BT, Jerry Goldsmith, Gorecki, Hans Gregory Williams, Don Davis, Danny Elfman, Alan Silvestri, John Williams, James Newton Howard, Edward Shearmur, St. Germain, ES Posthumus, Gustav Holst, Bill Brown, James Horner, John Barry, Trever Rabin, John Adams, Bernard Hermann, Alex North, Jeff Rona, Richard Bona, Bobby McFerrin, Peter Gabriel, Sting, Sly and Robbie, Enya, Ennio Morricone, Bach, Mozart and others.
But the far majority of influences is actually coming from people in the established VI-community, including well-trimmed puddles such as Thomas Bergersen, Boomjinx aka Oistein, Tobias Marberger, Nick Phoenix, Alex Pfeffer, Gabe Shadid, Craig Sharmat, Aaron Sapp, Alex Towering, Colin Malley, Big Bob and a few friends at Remote Control. The VI-community is really where it happens and there are so many talented people out there. I wish I could mention you all, but … anybody reading this magazine is probably within this category, unless you hang out at NS…
But there is another side to it that people often neglect, which is related to business and networking. I personally think that these are crucial skill sets to become a successful composer and value on par with the ability to compose, which reminds me about the brilliant quote:
“Just because nobody understands you – doesn’t mean you are an artist”.
Tell us about the tools in your arsenal (sequencer, computers, monitoring, plugins, etc) and what else do you have in your rig?
Thank you for asking the ultimate über geek DAW question. I am quite fanatical about setups, but I have also learned that the amount of computers and plugins really don’t matter at the end of the day. The best tracks I have done are less then 20 tracks and the worst have over 600.
My setup is a 10 PC based rack-server solution essentially broken down into instrumental sections (3 strings, 2 brass, 1 wood, 2 percussion, 1 choir and 1 ethnic/solo vocals) The main machine is a Quad-core, which is the biggest leap I have ever tried in terms of raw-processing power. I did some initial tests and loaded over 30 high-end convolution reverbs and still didn’t see it chuck over 50% and currently running a +600 track template. I am still running 32-bit, since a variety of applications are not running in 64-bit yet, unfortunately. I believe I am going to make the shift sometime in late 2008 depending on quality of support. I am still contemplating on whether to convert to MAC, but a variety of the plugins I use are not MAC-based. I use Genelec speakers for stereo monitoring and Yamaha speakers for 5.1.
Regarding plugins I could talk all day long. But I want to mention two plugins that caught my attention recently. The first one is Dblue Glitch (PC), which is the ultimate BT killer plugin and one of the greatest plugin innovations ever done. The plugin also happens to be free, which is a great sign of the non-commercial sample world making significant progress. Glitch allows you to do real-time “glitching” of anything you want by either controlling glitch-FX via midi-keyboard or just have the program do random glitches in your music. The second plugin is Time freezer (PC/MAC), which is this insane program allowing you to sculpt ambient drones out of anything. It essentially takes a small part of a .wav file and freezes it by using different time-stretching and cross-fading techniques. The greatness about this plugin is that it truly allows you to carve drones out of any music material and make it your own. So if you have a certain piece of music you like – you simply freeze it, render out different time-chops and make it your own. It is a must have for anybody interested in ambient scoring. I also use UAD and POCO cards that help on processing- and mastering side.
Regarding other gear I have been trying to cut down. The majority of my gear is really based on my interest in custom sampling. The first one is my beloved Zoom H4, which is the ultimate stun-gun looking field recorder. I use it every day and it is truly amazing at what it does. It’s essentially a $299 field-recorder with condensed microphones on it. You can also plug XLR into it, so I normally do custom recording by plugin a set of Neumann mics into it. I believe Zoom recently came out with a 5.1 version of it called H2, which is currently listed at $199 or something and essentially allows you to record 5.1 on the spot with on-board mics, however it doesn’t have XLR.
Analog gear counts: 5-string Schecter, 7-string Ibanez, 6-string semi-acoustic Ibanez, POD XT, 50 ethnic flutes from Lark in the Morning and the mighty Hang Drum, which I am still considering to sell on Ebay, since the last one went for 8K. But there is a karma quality to the hang drum, which is difficult to explain. The drum is extremely pressure sensitive and virtually impossible to translate fully into the sample realm due to its complex resonance chamber and metal composition.
Oh and my beloved Virus TI, which is a crazy beautiful and somehow haunted piece of synth hardware.
You’re also a Ph.D scholar in Game Music? Tell us about that.
I have always had interest in the academic side of things, so while living as a composer I also took a few master degrees in different subjects and eventually decided to combine my passion for music with my passion for academia. Game music is a challenging subject from a scientific point of view, since it has never been studied before. So I had to translate some of the more established theories from other auditory sciences to my studies. There is a great deal of cognitive studies on auditory perception and a variety of studies in the field of motion picture music and how it affects the listener. However one of the new challenges with game music is its dynamic/adaptive potential, which is unlike other types of music for static media. The interactive nature of game music is absolutely breaking new ground.
A significant part of my Ph.D. studies in game music related to developing new methodologies for advanced types of application of music in the game. One of my main focal points was – and still is – the development of something I call: “Micro-scoring”. Micro-scoring is essentially about breaking the score into a variety of small components that are assembled in real-time according to player action and/or interaction. The micro-scores are made in such a way that they adapt to player action or interaction. You have to imagine that there are thousands of things going on in the game environment — the idea behind micro-scoring is to support the major elements in the environment. An example can be a 3-second score for breaking pillars or falling stones, which is scored in the same key as the main ambient background score. We also have more detailed types of micro-scores which are based on both real-time time stretching and slice based samples. This allows us to fully adjust pitch- and timing based on player interaction with the game. An example of this is adjusting beat to footsteps and increasing tempo when she starts running. A good example of micro-scoring application relates to chopping up a score in multiple components. So essentially composing a score in 15 different steps and cutting each step up, so it can seemingly integrate into any of the other 15 steps. The system then blends the steps in real-time and you have a much more varied and versatile score – made from micro-scores. This allows you to adjust mood in music with using basic cross-fades, but actually have adaptive types of compositions. Needless to say it’s a fairly complicated effort.
When we first met, I remember getting a lot of different cues that at the time were very good, but lately your stuff has gotten so much better. What are you doing differently now?
There is talent (10%) and exercise (90%). I don’t have a particular talent for music, but I have a desire for learning and being open-minded towards emotions and influences. I speak of this as a “free mind”, which is my mushroom philosophy of an unbiased, naïve, mental condition where you just do what feels right. I know it sounds strange, but allowing myself to work un-constricted helped me a lot. I believe all composers battle their own compositional patterns and realizing that I don’t have to battle them anymore was a great step forward. However it is hard to speak of a free mind without a framework. My framework has been 20 years of having fun with music, which is my way of exercising. You have to know the rules before you can bend them.
I personally believe music is all about generating emotions. It doesn’t have to be complex. It doesn’t have to be a John William. It doesn’t have use the best technology in the world. But it must have the nerve. A beating heart. A pulse. A breath. Otherwise it ends up being a midi-based saxophone solo in an elevator or a “Strangers in the night” pan-flute mockup in your local supermarket.
So back to your question. What am I doing differently now? The best answer I can give is one word: “Listen”. I listen to music and learn from it. I ask when there is something I don’t understand and the VI-community is priceless in this context. The combination between the “free mind” and the ability to listen are the two main things I do differently.
I always different listening periods where I focus on different types of listening exercises. I remember from 2005-2006 I was mainly focused on understand mix- and balance between instruments, which helped me significantly moving forward. These days I am mainly listen for counter point melodies and trying to understand their purpose in compositions. I constantly listen for any counter points and investigate their technique in the composition.
But it also important to recognize what did not help me move forward. I believe one of the most frequent composer illusions is that technology or software will make them better composers. I personally don’t believe in this philosophy – just like running shoes don’t run by themselves. But this is obviously a subjective observation. It is my fault I cannot make a masterpiece with my $299 Zoom H4 field recorder.
You’re part of custom sample libraries (groups of composers who pool finances and editing time to develop private libraries). Why bother when there are so many great ones out already?
All libraries have their advantages and disadvantages – and different philosophies on recording techniques, performance techniques and programming techniques. One of the frequent complaints is that libraries somehow restrict compositions, since you compose for the library more then you compose for yourself. The custom sample libraries provide you the opportunity of recording libraries the way you want them. I personally do it for the following reasons:
* Natural, hall based, verb in samples (No reverb can match natural reflection)
* Emotionally invested- and dedicated performances (Uninspired performance is one of the main reasons that sustained samples don’t work in the sample realm, IMHO)
* Effects (Conventional libraries go light-hearted on effects, which is one of the major components used in soundtrack scoring)
* No noise reduction of acoustic samples (Noise reduction hurts the samples and tends to remove the natural reflection and properties in the audio)
* Wrong samples (Conventional libraries tends to cut out the “wrong” samples that may have a slight off pitch or chaotic aspect to them. I keep them for the same reason, since “mistakes” are unavoidable in any acoustic context and helps bring life into the samples).
* I made it (The feeling of recording your own samples or being a part of sample project can be deeply satisfying. The performance and sampling is fun. Editing … not so much).
* Playability (We all know how certain patches just work for us – both sounding good and being great to play. I refer to this as the playability of the samples, which is one of the most important things. It doesn’t really matter whether you recorded a 192khz string library, if it doesn’t play well or was made from uninspired performers and un-dynamic programming.)
There is a variety of other components that goes into the custom philosophy. One of the last major custom sessions I was involved with was the sampling of a symphonic choir. We realized that none of the current libraries could sing extremely fast phrases and none of them had true legato features, which eventually became our motivation for recording it. We all learned a great deal from the session and it is now a part of my template together with the other great commercial choir libraries.
People have different philosophies on the subject of sample libraries, but I try to have an open mind about all libraries whether they are commercial or custom. It really comes down to what you like and what sounds good to you. As the great Doctor Phil says: “There is no reality. Only perception”.
Please describe your MIDI approach. Are you playing in these parts live, scoring them in, or using a MIDI event editor of some kind? What type of MIDI edits do you do generally?
I am not really technical with MIDI and my MIDI approach is different based on the style of music I compose, whether it is super polished and tight electronica or more lively orchestral scores. So I cannot really say I have a one-trick Pony in this regard, since I like to experiment most of the time. The orchestral scores generally have a more structuralized approach, since they build on my +600 track orchestral template, which mainly consists of custom libraries and commercial libraries such as QLSO XP and TS1/TS2. I sometimes use quantization on orchestral scores depending on need and application, however the general rule of thumb is to play things without it, since it tends to create a more vivid sound. I do use quantization in orchestral scores, especially when it comes to more tight layering of rhythms, but I normally have a 2-4% randomization of the note placement. I also have dedicated percussive templates, which I sometimes use afterwards to boost up the percussive sections. I generally use percussion a lot, so that’s why I build custom templates for this group in particular.
It gets a bit more complicated when we start discussing MIDI approach in the electronic realm, since it is often based on what sounds cool or feels good – and highly related to the “free mind” I was rambling about earlier on. I like putting sounds together, so sometimes I will sit with my Virus and combine different arps – then add some beats and lead synths – run it all through glitch – render all the tracks and rerun them through glitch again. Other times I will just play a drone and play live instruments over it with plenty of verb/delay – then render the track and play it through timefreezer and then start scoring on whatever soundscape I created. Timefreezer will create the most beautiful ambiences and a single verbed piano on top of that can do it for me.
Do you find yourself using a lot of samples from your Custom Library sessions?
I have been using more and more custom samples as the years have progressed due to some of the reasons I mentioned earlier, whether it is custom orchestral, vocal, choir, percussion or ethnic instruments. However custom samples do have the same issue as commercial samples, since they will define what you can compose and what you cannot compose. The real frontier for me is live instruments, which is why I spend the majority of my time practicing on electric- and acoustic bass and guitars, percussion/drums and violin, which is crucial for understanding and improving custom string samples. I would advice anybody to practice on the instrument they intend to sample, since it provides a much better understanding of the instrument and its capabilities, especially in relation to all the details we often miss in both custom- and commercial libraries.
I also find it more inspiring and fun to play live elements. It gives another sense of soulful purpose to the process of scoring – at least for me. However samples can do so many things that I cannot in the live realm, so I just feel privileged having so many amazing options.
Congratulations on your Tec Award. That is a huge achievement!?
Thank you. The TEC award means a great deal to me, since it is the first time it was ever given to interactive productions. The previous winners count Frank Zappa, Quincy Jones, Bob Moog, Bruce Swedien, George Lucas, Bruce Springsteen, Janet Jackson, Ferrell, Les Paul, Chaka Khan, Laurie Anderson, Will Lee, TODD AO, Ocean Studio and a lot of other myths that I don’t deserve any comparison to.
