I'm quite new to using a LAN for composing, so this question might be a bit "newb-ish":

If my child computer (the sample tank with VEP7) is running on Windows 10, but my main computer is running on Windows 11, is that going to cause any issues?

Originally Posted by: Dietz

Well, this sounds like a logical development, but actually it defies the whole idea of Ambisonics, which always works on the assumption of _one_ listener's position. This is less of an issue when we work in 1st Order Ambisonics by means of virtual microphone capsules (as we do in MIR Pro), but it gets confusing quickly as soon as we introduce the so-called "coefficient-based" decoding in HOA (Higher Order Ambisonics), which looks at a room as a holistic entity that gets "projected" by loudspeakers. 

So, in a nutshell: We don't have plans to offer more Microphone Positions than two at the same time. But the good news is that you will be able to "roll your own" by using more than one instance of the same Venue, since MIR 3D allows you to set up multiple "tabbed" rooms.. ;-)

Kind regards,

From what (little) I've read of how Ambisonics works, that makes sense.  I always wondered why the secondary mic is wet-only, and I suppose that's why! 

Luckily, those options are more than plenty to create enough of a spatial image to match with multi-mic libraries (at least in stereo, never worked in surround or 3D).  The way I've come to see (and primarily use) MIR Pro is to "stamp" or "print" a multi-mic spatial impression onto dry signals, whether Vienna Instruments, third party stuff, or live recordings.  Dry signal approximates spot mic, main mic approximates the "decca" (although I know it's actually coincident, I just mean the main array that's usually a decca tree in multi-mic libs), and secondary mic approximates far/ambient/hall/whatever mic.  Dialing in that mix and allowing the engine to take care of all the nitpicky stuff that would normally take multiple plugins, lots of panning, and general head-scratching is *such* a time saver.  What's more, the IRs are locational to an absurdly detailed degree, meaning that solo instruments never sound like they are coming from center stage that's panned left or right, but from actual stage right stage left upon "recording". 

Originally Posted by: Dietz

So do I, but it looks like we have a shortage of available developers on the VSL software team ATM. 8-/ ... the conversion of all VSL products to iLok-based copy protection seems to be much more challenging than expected. *sigh* ... it doesn't look like the targeted release date of "later this year (2021)" is realistic anymore.

For what it's worth, this particular customer is patient and content.  All things worth doing are worth doing right, and that takes whatever time it takes.  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Yeah, those libraries are unbelievable (as in unbelievably good and detailed).  They are also VERY well organized and mapped out, unlike others I've used.  It's been so damn easy to set them up in my template, organize the drum mappings, and keep everything straight and accessible.  This is a strong suit of VSL's, in my opinion.

Originally Posted by: Dietz

If you work in stereo only, you'll mainly benefit from the new preset system, improved usability, and of course compatibility with new operating systems, CPUs, and GPUs. If you're working in surround, the sonic advantage will be enormous. If you're working in 3D, then there's no comparison anyway.

Looking forward to tabbed instances with different reverb tails, in particular! 

Also, Dietz, a question (that you've probably answered before, apologies in advance):

The secondary mic is a fantastic, demonstrably beneficial feature, but I've always wondered...why stop at a secondary?  Why not a third or fourth to simulate outriggers and whatnot?

Originally Posted by: Sekrit_Studios

OMG, thank you so much for asking this...

I wish that this were in the FAQ or something.  I've been laboring over whether to begin with silent stage or synchron stage for weeks because I do NOT want to be locked into any sound stage.  And when I finally came to understand what "Silent Stage" was, which is the most brilliant concept ever, I came to find out that Synchron supercedes, it and that all surround technologies will ignore silent stage.  I feel like i'm taking crazy pills.

 

Like who opts OUT of creative control to place their "Players" where they want (especially when no other company seems to be doing it).  I'm a bit heartbroken.  

It's worth noting that with Synchron-IZED libraries, you can disable the IR and reverb and use essentially use them just as you would the silent stage libraries.  They are, in fact, the same samples, just pre-configured to "sit" with full Synchron products.

*Synchron* products, on the other hand, have the room information inherent in the samples.

Originally Posted by: Kai

In the past I did this in Logic's Environment, but any software that allows real time Midi processing should be able to do this. I just created a corresponding script for Logic's Scripter Midi Plug-In (which is based on Java script).

This is what it does:

- The velocity of every incoming note-on event first has to be stored in some variable vel, Then the note-on event has to be duplicated and the first instance has to be converted to a velocity x-fade controller event with value vel

- When controlling velocity x-fade with channel pressure (aftertouch) only an increase starting from the initial value is possible. For this the channel pressure event with value cp has to be transformed into a velocity x-fade controller event with value vel+cp/127*(127-vel)

- Alternatively when controlling velocity x-fade with the pitchbend wheel any relative change (increase or decrease) is possible. The pitchbend event with value pb (in the interval -8192<pb<8192) has to be transformed into a velocity x-fade controller event with a value depending on the sign (i.e. pitchbend up/down):

if pb>=0 then vel+pb/8192*(128-vel)

if pb<0 then vel+pb/8192*vel

This is above my pay grade at the moment, both literally and figuratively, but I'm definitely going to save this information for a later date.  Thank you so much for sharing!

As stated in the title.  Hope these help!

Originally Posted by: Kai

I had implemented this in Logic via some Midi pre-processing in the past and it worked just fine (either with aftertouch or the pitchbend wheel). It would be great if such a mode would be implemented in the VSL players in the future.

That sounds...amazing!  If I had a controller capable of aftertouch, I'd try it out right away.  The pitchbend wheel, on the other hand... 

If you don't mind, could you elaborate on the pre-processing you did?  I don't use Logic, but I'm betting there's a way to replicate it somehow...

Originally Posted by: thomas_hjl

Hi everyone, 

I am currently learning how to use Synchron Strings Pro proficiently and I have noticed that Paul in his YouTube videos controls the Vel-XF (velocity cross-fade) with the Hornberg Midi breathe controller. 

I am just wondering, isn't it better to use an after-touch keyboard to control the Vel-XF? Honestly I have never used an one before but the concept seems right to me.

Seeing the videos convinced me that I must find a way to control the vel-XF, but if After-touch works, then, perhaps I could skip the step of buying an expensive Breath controller? What do you guys think?

I hope I am not resurrecting some fight provocative thread, I am just hoping to be educated. 

Thomas

Thomas,

I've actually wondered the same thing, as I'm interested in using either to control VelXF myself.  One thing that occurs to me is that aftertouch (as far as I understand it) doesn't engage until after you've pressed the key down.  So, assuming the point of aftertouch is that more pressure = higher CC values, wouldn't that mean that playing something like scales would result in very strange, quiet, and uneven performance?  Since the curve starts at 0, that means it wouldn't engage past that until you land on a key and press it down hard enough to engage aftertouch.  So, if you're playing a fast run that's supposed to crescendo evenly, that means you're continually landing on key after key, but without the time or pressure needed to keep the aftertouch curve engaged in a smooth way.

That said, this is all conjecture: I have very little experience with using aftertouch, so if I'm wrong or misguided about this...please, anyone, chime in!

Originally Posted by: Paul

The answer is no.... But you can get the BBO D-F BEFORE you get Synchron Percussion III. They are now also available at special pricing. 

Best, 
Paul

Oops, I did it out of order!  Oh well.

I just have to say, SYN Percussion I-III is fantastic.  This is one of the most consistent, deeply sampled, functional libraries I've ever worked with.  What I particularly appreciate about it is that there are no frills: just really, really intricate and deep-sampled instruments as well as clean recordings in flexible mic positions that fit like a glove in a variety of applications.  Sounds great, works great, easy to use...This is a true workhorse, and I hope everyone at VSL is happy with how it turned out (I sure am!).

Originally Posted by: beatpete

Paul:

I'd just like to re-iterate how useful it would be to have a third option to have iLok locally on each computer therefore not requiring a dongle OR an internet connection.

Quite a few composers I'm in touch with state the dongle/cloud (or, to put it another way, lack of machine activation) is the only thing preventing them from purchasing VSL products.  It's anecdotal, but I see that sentiment echoed throughout various forums as well.  I suppose it comes down to a cost/benefit analysis...

Paul,

In the Standard version of SYN Percussion III, is there any way to access the high, high surround, and surround mics for the BBO content that's included?

Originally Posted by: Macker

Yes indeed Sam, that's my current fav bad*ss plugin! (Sorry for any inconvenience; I avoided naming the actual devices in my original post for fear of being moderated for promoting non-VSL products in this forum).

No worries!  That's a good point, I'll edit my previous post.  Thanks!

[EDIT: got the answer]

Originally Posted by: Paul

Hi, 

Synchron Percussion III contains the complete content of BBO: Dorado, Eridanus and Fornax. 

Best,
Paul

Thanks again!

Paul,

Another question: are *all* the BBO percussion ensembles included in Synchron Percussion III, or just some?

Originally Posted by: Paul

Hi, 

The Synchron Percussion Bundle is here to stay!

Best, 
Paul

Excellent!  That helps inform my purchasing decisions.  Thank you!

Paul,

Quick question:

After this month's introductory sale, will the Synchron Percussion Bundle continue to be available, or is it just for October?

Originally Posted by: LAJ

(... with hopefully a better Time Stretch-Performance. Literally NO ONE is able to manage bigger Projekts with this Time Stretch CPU-Killer. First I thought it was me or my computer. But the Library Testers on YouTube (With the latest PCs and Macs) are unhappy too.)

Yes, the Stretch Factor function just about lights my computer on fire the minute I activate it.  Glad to know I'm not the only one!

Originally Posted by: symphonic riot

Hello Sam,

actually "timbre control" is available in VI pro when using Articulate Presets:

Unfortunately, it's not.  I'm specifically talking about "Timbre Adjust", which is a feature VSL recently introduced to the Synchron Player (coinciding with the release of Synchron Brass).  It's a proprietary intelligent filter control that behaves like a multiband expression fader, scaling different frequency ranges at different intensities (or maybe there's something else going on under the hood...?).  The result is a CC the pros of both Expression and Filter into one control, and (on woodwinds and brass), it sounds quite convincing.  Alongside VelXF, it can be used to "massage" through the VelXF layers to mask the phase-y shift that can occur, esp. in solo instruments.  Hence, why I think it's so useful for solo woodwinds!  At this point, only the Synchron Player has this feature.

That said, those articulate presets look mighty interesting!  I'll definitely take a look, thanks!

Originally Posted by: Macker

When I first considered relative prices I totally forgot that Syz Solo Strings doesn't have Sordino! So, guessing a list price for Syz Solo Strings II (all the Sordino articulations ported across - assuming VSL chooses to do it eventually), the VI route no longer seems the more expensive option in my case.

Above all, the clincher for me was that I didn't want to risk going Syz and be left without Sordino for ages or maybe forever, and facing that dreadful "no sensible way back" feeling in view of VSL's one-way crossgrade discount policy. (I've tried and tried, but haven't yet found a truly satisfactory way of simulating Sordino.)

And I totally forgot the VI Solo Strings Bundle includes Violin II and Cello II.  Given the current sale , I think everything you're saying makes perfect sense!  Given the pattern of VSL's releases, it's pretty likely that SYN-zed Solo Strings Sordino will come along at some point.  Take that with a grain of salt, though; I don't work for VSL nor do I have any insider information.  I'm just a groundling :-)  

Originally Posted by: Macker

Sam, thanks so much! I'm obliged to you for your meticulous comparisons, especially in the case of WW - by far the most useful comparison I've seen to date.

Right now I'm seeking advice while mulling whether to buy the VI Solo Strings bundle in the sale, or else bide my time until the next Synchron sale and forgo the VI version forever.

Though it would be more expensive for me to go the VI route now and crossgrade later, uppermost in my mind is the still matchless quality of VI Solo Strings.

But there's also the question of 'driveability' of VI versus Synchron libraries. It's a leap in the dark for me because I've no experience of driving VI Pro in the highly intricate and often high-speed 'slalom'-type circumstances of programming solo instruments. I'm therefore extremely curious to know - from anyone in a position to help on this - whether the VI Pro or the Synchron Player has any relative advantages or disadvantages in programming demanding solo parts - most especially in the case of solo string parts.

Macker,

You're welcome!  I'm glad my observations are useful :-)

My personal experience with the VI Solo Strings VS SYN-zed Solo Strings:

The SYN-zed Solo Strings are - next to the SYN-zed Dimension Libraries and perhaps the SYN-zed Appassionata and Chamber Sordino - the only SYN-zed libraries I would actually consider a real upgrade/expansion compared to a stripped down layering tool, and therefore worth the price.  Here's why:

• You get Violin II and Cello II, which is MUCH more value than the VI bundle (not factoring in sale prices, of course).  You can do a traditional string quartet without having to pitch-duplicate Violin I or discount-wrangle to get Violin II.  
• The library turns the perf_rep articulations into "multi-shorts", which exponentially increases the amount of short articulations you have available (which is incredibly useful in solo strings, as you can imagine!)  What this feature does is detect whether you're in the middle of a phrase or at the beginning of one, and adjust the round-robins accordingly.  In a semi-recent project, I used this feature extensively and was able to create phrases that combined arpeggios with repeated notes without having to switch between perf_rep and staccato/spiccato patches.  Out of curiousity, I tried to replicate this just using the VI version and it wasn't possible.
• The scaling release sample feature lets you inject pre-recorded dynamic patches in the middle of phrases without that abrupt cut-off from the dynamic sample.  Such a small detail, but it allows for so much!
• With a slight exception (elaborated below), the library includes EVERY SINGLE ARTICULATION from the VI versions.  Huge thumbs up!
• As with all SYN-zed libraries, you can turn off the impulse response and use it like the dry VI version.  In fact, every time I've used them I've done this!

There are a few tiny quibbles: Violin II and Cello II's fast_rep patches don't include cut release versions, and the fast legato patches for at least Violin I sound somewhat phase-y to me (although that might be my ears playing tricks on me).  But, in comparison to the above points, these are absolutely not deal-breakers for me.

Re: drive-ability

I use REAPER and an articulation management script for it that works very, very easily and smoothly, so from my POV the libraries have the exact same workflow: set up some keyswitches, program the script accordingly, and go to town with what is essentially REAPER's version of expression mapping. 

Therefore, I have no idea whether or not one is more easily programmed than another outside of my particular set-up.  If I had to guess, I would say they're both the same, as they both use keyswitches and controllers to switch articulations, and both are easily configured and set-up to your particular taste. 

Synchron Player's "Dimension" structure makes it easier to create "playing modes" since it remembers where you are in a particular category of selection, but I'm sure you already know this.  It's worth mentioning, though, since strings (and their huge amount of playing styles) are probably the kinds of libraries that make the most use of this kind of functionality.

Synchron Player is a bit buggier and prone to hiccups than VIPro for me (unless it's loaded up in Vienna Ensemble, in which case they both behave equally nicely.)  I'd bet money this is particular to my computer, however (it's 7 years old).

In short: other than the few quibbles I mentioned, I can't see how SYN-zed Solo Strings is in any way a downgrade from VI Solo Strings, and I can see many ways in which it's an upgrade.

Hope that helps!

Originally Posted by: PaoloT

Since the non-looped version is also supplied, you can simply drag & drop the one at the place of the other. Not yet tried with the woodwinds, but for solo strings pieces not requiring long notes, or where you can split long notes into separate bows, it works great.

Paolo

I know how to re-assign patches in the SYN player, Paolo.  I have tried the SYN-zed Woodwinds: you indeed can do what you just laid out, and it does work just fine.

Here's what you can't do (let's use Flute I as an example):

• Access the perf_trill patch independently.  Instead, you have to rely on the player's detection algorithm and work around it.  In the VI version, you can do it either way.
• Access the unlooped, "pure" perf-legato_fast patch, because it isn't there.
• Access the perf-marcato_fast patch, because it isn't there.
• Access the perf-grace patch, because it isn't there.
• Access one of the perf_rep legato patches, because it isn't there.
• Access one of the perf_rep staccato patches, because it isn't there.
• Access one of the perf_rep portato patches, because it isn't there.

I think you get the point.  The SYN-zed Woodwinds lose functionality when compared to the VI versions.  Not just that, but core functionality: those articulations and the ability to access them individually allow the library to be much more expressive and flexible, which is especially important for solo instruments (like woodwinds!)

For brand new VSL customers, the SYN-zed Woodwinds are a much, much more affordable option than buying the VI woodwinds.  To get comparable functionality:

VI Pro + MirX Synchron + WW Bundle (VI, full) = 1230 euros
SYN-zed Woodwinds = 445 euros
Note: I'm not factoring in sale prices here

This is GREAT for new VSL customers, and I'd be remiss not to praise that.  But I'm not talking about new customers, I'm talking about crossgrading/upgrading and the price around that.  It makes zero sense for an upgrade or crossgrade to take functionality away.  Why would someone pay money to lose something?

One might say, "Well, the functionality added is the impulse response, not necessarily the articulations."  

MirX Synchron is (outside of sale price) 95 euros.  Add VI Pro to that, and it's 150.  SYN-zed WW are 445.  95/150 euros is a LOT less than 445 just to add spatialization.

One might also say, "Well, what if someone owns only one or two VI woodwinds, and wants a cheaper upgrade to the whole instrument family?"

That's a great point.  On the surface, it seems to make more financial sense to do so.

But this gets to the heart of the matter.  Questions like the OP - "Which should I get, VI or SYN-zed?" - keep popping up.  If VSL wants people to migrate to the Synchron Player, then the answer should always be SYN-zed.  But it's absolutely not.  Instead, the SYN-zed libraries are maddeningly inconsistent in their offerings.  This results in confusion, disappointment, and - from a business perspective - loss of customers and revenue (in the long run).

Let's take Flute I as an example again.  An owner of Flute I may indeed choose to upgrade to SYN-zed WW and thus get the whole instrument family for a vastly reduced price than if they were to go the full VI route.  However, they lose all of what I just elaborated on at the beginning of this post.  So they get their brand new, shiny SYN-zed WW, open it up, and find out that their SYN-zed Flute I is a compromised, stripped down version of their VI Flute I.  They were lead to believe - from all the marketing - that SYN-zed WW are superior to VI.  But they're not.  At best, they're a trade-off. 

Compare this to VI Dimension versus SYN-zed Dimension.  The SYN-zed Dimension are indeed superior to the VI Dimension, because they're the same exact library, just with the added benefits of the Synchron Player and Impulse Responses!  Sure, we miss out on the paper-rustling sounds, but those are nowhere near the same value as entire perf interval patches.  If the marketing around SYN-zed libraries is to be believed, this should be the case with ALL SYN-zed libraries.

A more egregious example would be in the strings department.  An existing owner of the VI Appassionata I library (Full) will have to pay 125 euros for the crossgrade.  According to the website, this is a library that "offers a wide variety of articulations".  That's just not true; the library ditches so much of the original material from Appassionata I yet costs 125 for the crossgrade OR a whopping 415 euros (for brand new customers) for...legato with vibrato control.  You can get the standard library of Synchron Strings Pro for 30 euros more and get a truly comprehensive and vastly superior string library. 

If the marketing stated, "This is a library that's meant as a layering tool for Synchron products", then it would be honest.  It still wouldn't be worth 415 euros, but at least customers would know what to expect and wouldn't have to go digging to avoid any "hidden disappointments".  One could say the library is can be viewed as an *expansion* to the original Appassionata.  But it's not an expansion because it's in an entirely separate sample player!  If it was an expansion, then the non-vibrato articulations would also be added to the VI versions of the libraries.  Instead, it's - you guessed it - a trade-off, and not a sensible one at that.

So what's the purpose of SYN-zed libraries?  Are they a more compact, stripped down version of VI libraries meant for those on a budget?  Are they layering tools for Synchron products?  Are they upgrades from their VI counterparts?  At the moment, different libraries have different practical applications, but they're all marketed and priced as upgrades from the VI counterparts, which doesn't line up with reality.  They're definitely not expansions, as they're in an entirely separate player.

I don't mean to be pointlessly negative: I would very much like all of them to be genuine upgrades from their VI counterparts, which is why I'm bothering to type all this in the first place.  I hope that the folks at VSL read what I have to say and take it to heart.  Like I said before, if SYN-zed WW were indeed the VI Woodwinds - articulation for articulation - but with the added functionality of Synchron (release technology, Timbre Adjust, etc.), I would happily pay all the crossgrade prices, because Timbre Adjust is that amazing!  Alternatively, if that's not an option, I would like to know - clear as day - when the libraries are not upgrades but instead meant to be auxiliaries to Synchron products so it's crystal clear what I'm getting for my money.  I'm going to go out on a limb and bet that other customers feel the same way. 

Originally Posted by: Paul

Hi Sam, 

I wish that would have worked, but unfortunately this scaling simply produced too many artefacts... 

Sorry to have no better news there. 

Best, 
Paul

Ohhhhhhhh, that would explain it.  No worries at all.  Thanks!

Originally Posted by: muziksculp

  No Thanks. I would rather they just add the Slurred-Legatos to Synchron Strings Pro. This would be an awesome improvement to the library. 

Oh, absolutely!