Are there any news concerning a release date? The pre-order is running for a good solid two months now, and it feels like it is starting to stretch patience a little. Would be nice if VSL could go back to their old ways, which was announcing a product when it was ready, not when they thought it would be ready in a week or so but then miss that date by several months.

Hi crusoe,

Thank you very much. You are absolutely right about the mix. I have posted a new link where the bassoon is pushed further back into the room and blends better with the orchestra. More wet signal and less dry, just as you suggested. Sounds better to my ears, so thanks for the tipp!

Dewdman42 has a point in my opinion. With the upgrade to VE Pro 7 you either get downgraded from three licenses to just one, or you have to pay double the price of what the upgrade to VE Pro 6 cost. Advertising this as a new 'feature' feels disingenuous to me (in fact, it is the only 'feature' currently communicated apart from the integrated fx). If you feel you have to double the price of a software, please be upfront about it and explain why you feel it's necessary.

What is happening is that VSL is either downgrading us to one license for VE Pro 7, or asking double the price for three licenses. That is a substantial downgrade, or a hefty price increase. In my opinion, good marketing would have tried to explain it. Instead I feel as being taken for a fool.

Thank you Ben! The strings are Light & Sound Chamber Strings, with only a bit of reverb added.

Hi everyone,

Here is a piece for bassoon and orchestra in the classical style that I just finished. All the woodwinds are from VSL, and notably the solo bassoon is VSL's Bassoon 2:

https://app.box.com/s/ordyilcvbpofh0r94wng40zct11z0k2a


Any comments on the composition and/or the mockup are highly appreciated. Thanks for listening.

Dear VSL,

with VST2-support being ended, is Vienna Ensemble getting an update to support VST3-plugins? Any new plugins being developed from now on will only be available in the VST3-format.

https://www.steinberg.net/en/newsandevents/news/newsdetail/article/vst-2-coming-to-an-end-4727.html

Exactly. Very well written Gustar!

Thank you for chiming in Stefan. To me this answer means:

for technical reasons that cannot be disclosed VSL is selling an insurance against the failure of a system that the customer doesn’t need (but must use for the company’s sake). And for the same undiscloseable reasons it must be an insurance, and not a service that only needs to be payed for when it is used.

In my opinion this is not a fair solution.

What I don't understand: 5. clearly states that VSL can and will deactivate a lost/stolen/broken dongle. Why don't you just do that when necessary, instead of making us buy an insurance biannually? If Steinberg charges VSL for deactivation of licenses, why not just pass these fees on to the customer that needs the service when it is actually needed?

In my opinion customers should not have to buy an insurance against the deficiencies of a copyright protection system that VSL needs, not us. VSL should.

Hi Paul,

thank you for answering so quickly. Would it be possible to give at least a rough time frame? What are we looking at? Weeks, months, years? I was hoping a solution could be presented much sooner, but a year in and we are non the wiser. I start wondering if presenting a solution is at all that important to VSL.

Originally Posted by: Paul

Hi,

Nothing to share with you yet, still working on it!

Best, 
Paul

Dear Paul,

could you please give us another update? Another six months passed without any news in this regard. Thank you in advance.

Completely agree with Jimmy's assessment. In my opinion Synchron Strings I is a complete departure from principles that have made VSL so strong. And I am not talking about the dry recording philosophy here. I am talking about the depth at which articulations have been sampled, the meticulous programming, the refusal to take short-cuts etc. All of which are not present in Synchron Strings I anymore. In my opinion they focused on things that didn't pay off: an oversupply of mic positions, vibrato styles (which are all pretty similar), legato transitions (which don't sound natural to my ears and still don't include portamento though...) and dynamic layers. They bloat the size of the library with very little audible benefits. At the same time it made it impossible to include more articulations without heaving the library size into the terrabites. I had very high hopes for an ambient strings library from VSL exactly because of the principles outlined above. Unfortunately I can't find them to be present in Synchron Strings I.

The 'Synchronizing' of the Chamber Strings - something I expect to be but the first step in 'synchronizing' their VI libraries - is a concept that I find unconvincing as well. What is supposed to be the advantage of trading a lot of articulations against a baked in artificial ambiance? An ambiance that you could apply with MIR, or any other quality reverb programm, much more flexibly and to your own liking. It seems to devalue the MIR concept too, because apparently VSL is of the opinion that adding the Synchron Stage roompack to their VI libraries doesn't do it if you want to blend them with their Synchron libraries. Instead they want you to buy another product. But in that case, what does MIR with the Synchron Stage roompack actually do in VSL's opinion? Odd.

I wish the company the best, and I hope they can attract new customers with their synchron lineup who weren't interested in dry libraries. I myself have lost interest in any of their Synchron projects, be it Synchron libraries, the 'synchronizing' of VI libraries, or the stage itself. Instead I'll be using their 'old' VI libraries happily.

Originally Posted by: muziksculp

Unfortunately VSL has not posted any new Audio Demos of VSL Synchron Strings I, using the new Synchron Player.

The reason seems to be pretty obvious: it is not necessary because the new player doesn't sound different than the 'old' one. It's a different workflow, not a different sound. If it would sound vastly different, then VSL certainly would have advertised it and posted demos. Also, if you really wanted a response to your questions why not just send an e-mail to support? In my experience they are friendly, quick, and happy to answer any questions.

Any news on this from VSL? It's been a few months since Paul wrote that they were working on a better solution.

Originally Posted by: dterry

Originally Posted by: Dominique

Originally Posted by: dterry

Come on folks, show some professionalism here and stop pointing fingers at the OP for simply wanting to talk about the positives of Synchron Strings.

If that was the intention of this thread the title was a spectacularly bad pick. Basically it provoked anyone who has issues with Synchron Strings. 'Let's talk about the good things in Synchron Strings' would have inspired a completely different kind of thread, I am certain. 

So what if a topic isn't worded the way you think it should be?  Is it the job of posters here to monitor, police and object to thread titles, topics and opinions you don't like, or to judge the intent of other VSL users?  No, it isn't. 

So what if somebody posts something in a thread where you don't  think it belongs? Is it the job of posters here to monitor, police and object to off topic posts, or to judge if they are off topic or not? No it isn't.

Originally Posted by: dterry

Come on folks, show some professionalism here and stop pointing fingers at the OP for simply wanting to talk about the positives of Synchron Strings.

If that was the intention of this thread the title was a spectacularly bad pick. Basically it provoked anyone who has issues with Synchron Strings. 'Let's talk about the good things in Synchron Strings' would have inspired a completely different kind of thread, I am certain. It's a little simplistic to throw around provocations, and then lash out at the ones who bite. And asking to have a thread deleted because you don't like some of the opinions voiced in it - not commendable. William really does come across as neither mannered nor thoughtful, and unfortunately it's not the first thread where that is the case.

Originally Posted by: stephen limbaugh

As this is a discussion about legato, the purpose is to isolate the transitions between the notes, which are slurred together without a change in bow direction (thus, the groups of notes only have one “attack” sound on the first note of that group).

Got it. I missed that you wanted to showcase the transition only, not the preceding and following note. Convincing is not a word I would attribute to this example, but I am sure it is due to the lack of cc1 information, not the legato transitions themselves.

Have a happy new year everyone! See you in 2018.

Originally Posted by: stephen limbaugh

• no automation

Why would you ever gonna post something that you didn't even take the time to add some basic cc1? It is bound to sound like an organ, and so it does. I really don't see the point behind it, other than demonstrating how not to use a strings library. Sorry that the words are a little harsh, but you could have made it sound much better by spending just 20 seconds more on it.

Thought about contributing for a second, and I would really have liked to. It is a nice idea for a thread to share some melodies. But then reread the opening post. What a pretentious load of unreflecting flimflam. Assume whatever you want, I couldn't care less.