Paul, a request for a future release of VIPRO: when replacing a patch via the secret search&replace trick, also replace the Humanize preset with the same preset already assigned to that cell, but with the updated player number (for example, "DS In tune random md v1" with "DS In tune random md v2".

At the moment, it seems that most of the cells (but not all of them) take the Hpreset contained in the patch. This means that, if you don't use the default Hpreset, you have to manually reassign everything by hand.

Another thing that would speed programming a lot would be being able to select more cells, and apply an Hpreset to all of them at the same time.

Paolo

Paul,

Ah, very nice! So, I can simply choose the Auto-Humanize Matrices, and let VIPRO assign the default Hpresets after having replaced the patches for the various players.

I wonder why you decided to use the "md" (More Delay) Hpresets for your own presets. Is there any difference/advantage between using the default ones and the md ones?

Also, I'm creating presets with a mix of Dimension and Solo String patches. Would you suggest to apply "DS" Humanize presets to both, or Solo Strings patches would still work better with their default Hpresets, even in this mixed context? I'm thinking that using DS Hpresets for everything would blend better the Solo Strings with the Dimension Strings.

Paolo

Hi,

I'm building my own Dimension Strings presets, and will have to use the Humanize presets for each of the instruments.

I've seen that all the patches for, say, Violin P1 load with the "DS In tune random v1" Humanize preset.

VSL's factory presets assign different Hpresets to the different categories. Shorts (staccato, pizzicato, short detaché) have the "DS In tune fast v1" preset. Longs have the "DS In tune random md v1" assigned. The other articulations, like tremolos and repetitions, have the "DS In tune random v1" preset assigned.

Is there a preferred way to assign these presets? Are the default ones ok, or is it better to follow VSL's programming for their presets?

Paolo

Apart for the differences between baked in reverb and added reverb in orchestral ensembles, my main concern is that I'm not always writing for a full orchestra needing a big hall reverb. I very often write for smaller ensembles, requiring a smaller venue.

The great thing of VI+MIR is that you can also customize the ambience, and choose the right one. Teldex or Synchron are the best for an orchestral movie soundtrack. But for the rendering of a classical piece, the Great Hall at the Konzerthaus Wien is a lot better. And the dry studios at the Funkhaus are excellent for more neutral prototypes. And there are pieces that absoutely ask for a church reverb.

So, I really hope there is hope for the future of Vienna Instruments.

Paolo

Originally Posted by: William

Well I was just talking about the often used orchestrational effect

William, I'm sorry if I made confusion by inadvertently indirectly responding to you. What I was trying to say, is that the list of articulations in FX Strings, as written by Civilization, don't seem to fit in a traditional transition between articulations in a real orchestra. What is called "vertical trem", for example, should be what other call "vertical scrubs" or "spazzolato", a quick but smooth movement between tasto and pont, all in a single, repeated gesture.

Going from a "sul tasto", to "normal" or "ordinario", to "sul pont" is another matter, since this is, as you say, now considered common writing. With VI you can fade between two articulations. With SP you can do it with as many articulation as you like, but choosing is a dimension has to be "parallel" or "separate". In the first case, you can crossfade though the whole dimension (or tree branch).

Paolo

Originally Posted by: civilization 3

There are dimensions with 3 articulations, trem, half trem, vertical trem, trem sul point in FX Strings.

I'm aware of slot xfade, but isn't the A slot still going with B on top? At a certain point the higher slot isn't, in this.

The first case you describe is not exactly a crossfade. It seems more a selection of separate articulations via a continuous controller. The listed articulation don't seem to be inherently made for crossfading. Trem <> half trem can be crossfaded, but vertical trem <> trem sul pont don't seem to have any relation in a continuous space.

In VI, two slots can be crossfaded. You can choose either to let the controller increase the volume of the B slot, or crossfade between A and B. This is only possible with two articulations.

Paolo

A quick comparison of the two players is this, in my personal view:

- Synchron Player, based on a coherent metaphor of folder hierarchy, could be more immediate to grasp for the new user. How do you reach a particular sound? Just follow the path (as the Rabbit was telling Alice).

- Vienna Instruments' matrices are totally reconfigurable, and you can choose the number, size, position of the cells everywhere. Apart for you, nobody else will immediately be able to read a custom preset. And reading factory presets is not easier.

- Reaching a sound in VI can be a lot faster than in SP: point at that cell in the matrix. With SP, you have to go through the full path everytime.

- Crossfading between more that two layers is the real bonus of SP. Being able to fade between non vibrato, vibrato and molto vibrato, or between sul tasto, normale, and sul ponticello is something I've always wanted in VI. Will be there further development for VI? Please, add a third column of slots in a cell!

- Controller assignment is much quicker in SP. You don't use CC1, you use a meta-control that you can globally assign to CC1, but also to any other controller. With VI you have to reprogram all matrices. (This is another thing I would like to see in VI: meta-controllers!).

- The standalone version of VIP allows for nearly-quick replication of presets from existing presets. A true life-saver.

Paolo

I might have a different idea of 'customizable' and 'flexibility' than Stephen, in this case. To be clear: I'm referring to the building of an instrument from the several available patches/articulations. This is a type of flexibiliy preceding any FX, and focused on creating a sound with the raw possibilites of the original instruments. At the moment, it seems to me that Vienna Instruments Pro is the only player with that degree of power.

FX is a great thing, especially if one is after hybrid scoring. While I also do that kind of score, I'm very much interested in 'classical' orchestra simulation. I recently tried to reproduce the beginning of Messiaen's Quatuor, and I was able to find nuances like grace notes alternating with portatos and fast legatos to give an impression of realism. This is the original mission of VSL: making a credible simulation of a real ensemble/orchestra. It's also what makes them so different than the others.

In this vein: I hope VSL will expand their VI collection with more extended techniques. Orchestral Spheres and Dimension Strings III/sul tasto were beautiful tries. I hope there will be more for this kind of 'flexibility' in the future.

Paolo

Yes, they have both a place. Synchron for the ready-to-use libraries. Vienna Instruments for the more customizable ones. The one shouldn't replace the other.

Paolo

Dear VSL,

I like Vienna Instruments (Pro) very much, because of its flexibility. It may not be the right software for someone looking for a way to avoid looking into the engine, but it is perfect for someone customizing everything.

Customizing Vienna Instruments is a huge investment of work, time, knowledge, testing. A custom preset is a work of clockwork jewelry, of absolute precision. It would be awful having to trash away everything, and being forced to reprogram everything for a different player.

Can you assure that Vienna Instruments (Pro) will live for several years from now? I don't mean offering radical updates (it is very mature software), but with all that is needed to work flawlessly with any forthcoming operating systems.

Paolo

Hi,

I took the freedom to publish a review of the piano on my web site. [EDIT] The review is now also in English.

The review

The audio examples are not professionally produced, and may be a comparison from a common user's perspective.

Please note that these pages contain advertising (automatically chosen by Google).

Paolo

Vienna Instruments makes easy dealing with custom sets of articulation. Since they can be recalled when actually used, big presets may also be very light on memory.

As for myselft: yes, I prefer keyswitches! :)

Dancing keyswitches

Paolo

Paul, I put my question in this thread dedicated to the piano, to avoid making the other one too busy.

May you reveal if the Close mic included with the Light piano is the Close 1, 2 or 3 from the full library?

Thank you!

Paolo

Thank you very much, Paul. Very generous!

Paolo

Paul, will the Concert Light included in the new SE Vol.1 be discounted from the purchase of the Standard/Full library, as it has happened with the other instruments?

Paolo

Perfect midi rendering apart, it is a great work. The narrative quality pushes one's attention forward at each measure, and the very transparent orchestration lets one see the huge masses conflicting during the tight development. Lyrical moments are never devoided of the same tension of the more epic parts. More than strictly Romantic, I feel it as very Mahlerian, mixed with a more direct epic quality, a textural thickness that is, maybe, very American.

Paolo

Is the new Concert piano only a version with reduced velocity layers? By listening at the demos, it seems that there has been some other scaling down. Can some more details (and demos) be available?

Paolo

Another note to myself: recorded trills from the Chamber Strings collection are very compatible with Dimension Strings. Use them for the Dimension Strings as well! :)

Paolo

An alternative to myself: in the universal map (created for Logic's Articulation Set or Dorico's Expression Map) use the IDs reserved to higher-numbered rows to both larger intervals (for older libraries) and different types of trill/mordent (for modern libraries using performance trills).

This will allow the use of the same universal map, while easily adapting to the different libraries.

Paolo

Hi,

While building my universal preset, I created a 12x12 matrix for trills and mordents. This matrix includes various types of trills on the columns (trill, baroque trill, marcato trill, pont trill…), and the various intervals in the rows.

So, I end up with a matrix looking something like the one shown in the small table attached.

With more recent libraries (like Dimension Strings) recorded trills are no longer available. There are performance-trill articulations, and sequences playing them.

The APP Sequencer want to play each sequence with the cells of a row. You can't select arbitrary cells. So, I can have a min2 trill sequence for the first row, a maj2 trill sequence for the second row, and so on.

But I can't use the second column to play baroque trill sequences. I either have to replace larger intervals with baroque trills or mordents, or use different matrices for each type of trill/mordent.

Is there a way to let a sequence play any cell from the matrix?

If not, would you give up with the larger intervals (who uses maj7 trills?!?), or would you devote more matrices to trills?

I'm tempted to go for the first solution, but having a matrix open to any combination tempts me. At the same time, I understand that it would be more practicat to only consider what would be really used in the pieces.

Paolo

Hi,

While building my VI instruments, I'm putting them on test with pieces exploiting most techniques. I'm trying with Messiaen's Quartet, exploring the extremes of lower dynamic ranges.

https://soundcloud.com/ptram69/messiaen-quatuor-1

(The excerpt is not a performance, but an extract only used for didactical reasons).

Paolo

William, that's a very smart way of dealing with these articulations! Thank you!

Paolo

Ben, very clear, thank you. My doubt was caused by the fact that I preferred the perf-rep_spi sound as my base spiccato articulation (being more aggressive), but found the perf-spiccato used toward the end of the Sarasate tutorial. By listening carefully, I understand that that spiccato is used in a relaxed way, so this precise quality of that patch was used there.

Paolo