Vienna Symphonic Library Forum
Forum Statistics

182,255 users have contributed to 42,214 threads and 254,732 posts.

In the past 24 hours, we have 4 new thread(s), 24 new post(s) and 46 new user(s).

  1. Home
  2. Sample Libraries
  3. Vienna Instruments Libraries
  4. Synchron Vs. Traditional

  • Synchron Vs. Traditional

    M
    M

    Now that we have had some time to compare, what do you think? Old vs. New?

    Personally, I have Special Edition 1 on both the regular edition and the Synchron version. I have gravitated toward the Synchron. You can do more with the sounds. You can use the included impulses; or only the short/long convo  so you still get the Synchron panning; or choose the default settings, and do whatever you want with them in terms of reverb and panning.. I like having the Synchron pans available. I even use them for other libraries sometimes. I think it's a great tool. It also seems to load a little faster.

    What do other folks think?
  • PaoloTP
    PaoloTP

    Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but I guess you are not speaking about Synchron libraries, but Synchronized. But I may just understanding the wrong way.

    I'm using a mix of everything. In some cases I prefer to go Synchronized, because it makes sense. For example, if using Dimension Strings mostly as a compact ensemble, SYzd is much easier. Special Keyboards and Plucked Instruments have better labelling when SYzd.

    When needing Dimension Strings in more complex setups I prefer the old VI version, because I don't have to deactivate all the added impulses and effects before using them. There shouldn't be any difference in the available articulations. The same with Dimension Brass, that I only have in the VI version.

    At the moment, my VI collections are easier for me, because I've create all the presets by following the same schema. So, I have a unique map for everything. If I want to layer strings from different libraries, the same map will drive them all from a single MIDI channel.

    Several instruments are still only available as VI instruments, so there is no choice. Woodwinds, for example, or the more exoteric brass. Or some advanced articulations, like the ones in the Vienna Horn.

    I'm still not in love with the Synchron world, but I've been forced by the BBO series into it. I wouldn't probably have got Synchron Strings Pro without needing a match for BBO. It's a fantastic library, but not the best choice, as far as I can understand up to now, for what I do mostly. Yet, I know that we are in a courtship affair…

    BBO contains some incredible instruments. At the same time, FX Strings 1 is probably one of the most precious tools I have. I'm therefore switching my VI collections to the Synchron Wide MIR room, so that I can match them to the new collections. They integrate really well. And the Synchron hall can be really impressive, even if not the sound I would have chosen before the others.

    So, I'm in a hybrid setup, with a core made of VI, extensions from the Synchron/BBO series, and some Synchronized instruments. All blended inside MIR.

    Paolo
  • M
    M

    Yes, I mean Synchronized (sorry that was unclear). I can understand how it would be difficult to migrate when you have everything set up for Vepro, Mir, etc. I did not do much in the way of customization with the ensemble player, and I never really got into Vepro. In fact, I went back to the Ensemble Player because for me it was easier. 

    I find the Synchron player easier to deal with. but I too still will use the ensemble player at times, especially if I want to limit the number of instances. You can get a lot of Synchron players going if you're doing orchestral! fortunately, the Synchron player is not too power-hungry. I think it is a very well-designed piece of software.

    Thanks for your considered and informative reply.