Hello all! I've just purchased the recorders library and first impressions are very good. However, there's a couple of points that I'm not sure about. The first relates to the Soprano patch 42 RE-So_perf-rep_leg_noVib which appears to have vibrato (which obviously it shouldn't), and it sounds the same as the vibrato patch 41 RE-So_perf-rep_leg_Vib. I wonder if any others have noticed this? The second involves the Alto & Tenor samples. The Alto notes G#5, A5, A5# (A# not so bad) and the The Tenor notes D#5, E5, F5 (F not so bad) sound rather "thin" or "reedy" compared to the others. I'm not sure if this is due to the idiosyncrasies of the instruments used (if it is, then all's well & good!) or an actual sample problem. I have tried reinstalling the library with no effect. These minor niggles slightly detract from what is an otherwise excellent library which to my ears is the best recorder library presently available. I hope someone can confirm these findings or explain any workarounds. Thanks for any help anyone can give.
-
Recorder library questions
-
The second involves the Alto & Tenor samples. The Alto notes G#5, A5, A5# (A# not so bad) and the The Tenor notes D#5, E5, F5 (F not so bad) sound rather "thin" or "reedy" compared to the others. I'm not sure if this is due to the idiosyncrasies of the instruments used (if it is, then all's well & good!) or an actual sample problem. I have tried reinstalling the library with no effect. These minor niggles slightly detract ...
Yes it sounds awful and different. These "glassy sounding bugs" were communicated short after release of the Recorders many years ago. It seems that there Is no way to fix this, which is too bad. It destroys a good product which I do not use pretty much because of that.
-
Yes it sounds awful and different. These "glassy sounding bugs" were communicated short after release of the Recorders many years ago. It seems that there Is no way to fix this, which is too bad. It destroys a good product which I do not use pretty much because of that.
That is a shame as it takes the edge off the library. I'm very surprised that it's not been resolved considering the financial cost of the product along with the very high standards that VSL usually work to. I suppose one work around could be to use pitch bend, but that's a bodge at the very best! Still rather bemused by the vibrato on the non vibrato patch though.
-
We are all surprised ;) ... definately one of the worst cases in a VSL product and pretty famous (as you can see on my fast reaction) Do you have Melodyne or something comparable? Then you could reduce the Vibrato after the bounce. I know this makes everything technically and is time-eating... But Melodyne has become my Secret weapon to close those Vienna-gaps after the bounce from Instrument-Tracks to Audio-Tracks. (In general it would of course be timesaving and much more enjoyable to have Vienna-Self-Solutions)
-
In general... I don't want to discuss with you, William. (Especially after reading the "crazy-threads" which were pretty amusing for me, but paint a terrible picture of some people here.) But let me ask you something. If someone hears a problem in a Sound and even after years several people (INDEPENDEND from each other) explain exactly the same problem ... I think there must be something true on it. Do you agree? It had been easy as a joke for such an experienced Company to artificially fix this bug by using a sample which is ok and layering it over these 3 Keys/samples which sound different AS FIRST SAMPLE.
-
Here we go, there's always one! So everyone who has defined this fault is wrong?! I am not going to get into an argument with you. Life is too short for this kind of crap. I know what I can hear, and so can others.Are these people shills for another company? I seriously wonder this...
-
My reaction is based on how you dismiss the entire library, saying it bad overall, simply for one flaw - which is hardly noticeable. Instead of simply pointing out a bug. But I have no interest in debating it.
Two flaws actually. I would certainly not trash the whole on that basis. As I said ".. what is an otherwise excellent library which to my ears is the best recorder library presently available." As I like the library so much I am working around the debated "bad" samples using pitch bend. Everybody happy?!
-
Although I don't own Recorders library, I can totally imagine the flaws you are talking about. I am flute player and have tried couple of sizes of recorders. I think it is because with recorders there are certain notes have several different fingering alternatives, each one has a different tone and intonation. It is tricky when sample these instruments, because the consistensy of tone is hard to remain, sometimes It is even impossible when you play long notes. (if it is in runs or trills that's ok).
-
Is this the final word on the subject? Dietz? Such an old thread... but the issue of "bum notes" in (mainly) the Alto & Tenor Recorder instruments is really disappointing. These objectively weak notes should have been better volume-matched to the rest of the package and they simply were not. The only workarounds I've found mentioned here are pitch-bending or after-the-fact-Melodyne rendering. "Recorders" was nearly the first VSL library I bought, and it's great. But flawed. :( Also, The Soprano Recorders “42 RE-So_perf-rep_leg_noVib” seems to be a duplicate of “41 RE-So_perf-rep_leg_Vib”, as Albino mentioned two years ago.
If I can extend the range of instruments using VI Pro, can't I replace a note (and it's dynamic variations) within an articulation/patch? Why in the world hasn't VSL issued an update for this library? How many "man-hours" are required to (not even re-record them but digitally) replace a few individual notes?
