pat,

Did you check the out of tune notes against a mechanical tuner?

A little bit of this plugin applied to the dry signal should get you what you're after:

https://www.tokyodawn.net/proximity/

Ironically, I think it's the internet (esp. youtube!) that is contributing to less apathy/indifference and more connection to art and artists.  Sure, the balloon videos get millions of views, but I bet you anything 90 of those 100 Mahler views a) wouldn't be able to afford a ticket to a Mahler concert, b) don't live anywhere where a Mahler concert is available, c) have never even heard of Mahler before browsing random classical music playlists on Youtube.  What's more, I find the comment threads on those types of videos to be very positive and uplifting; nine times out of ten it's someone sharing what the music means to them, how much they like the part at a certain timestamp, how the music got them through a hard time in life, etc.  It fills me with no small amount of joy to see how music, even through such a seemingly vapid medium like youtube, brings all sorts of people together :)  Of course there are trolls and the like, but they seem to be an oddly small minority in those kinds of videos...

Agreed!  Good thing this forum exists...

One of the greatest gifts an artist could ever receive, I think, is to have another artist analyze and understand their work.  It's nice to have people say things like, "It's so lovely!" or "I really liked it!", but it's pretty neat when someone says something like, "Yo, that tritone you snuck in on bar 52 that works despite being an unresolved dissonance because it's hinting at the parallel Lydian mode?  That sh*t was fire, bro!".

That said, I think the best art (and music) is such that can be enjoyed by anyone of any denominator.  Like Bach.  Catchy and sing-able melodies for the lemmings, super-computer level harmonic and contrapuntal content for the Glenn Goulds!  

- Sam

What an interesting discussion!

I think jasensmith's analogy of actors and playwrights is spot-on.  I used to be a playwright (and actor) myself; I was always delighted to see what a good performer could do with even the most carefully and specifically worded dialogue and stage direction.  I was also subsequently disappointed and embarassed when a bad performer crushed my words into mundane, emotionless drivel.  I suppose it all boils down to who is performing your works.  If they're good, they'll elevate your ideas to a new level you never thought possible.  If they're bad, well...don't hire bad performers :)

I think it's also worth noting that the more room for improvisation, the farther a good performer will go towards elevating a piece of music.  In my opinion, great soloists in classical music tend to serve as virtuosic vehicles for the realization of precisely defined musical ideas, whereas in realms like jazz a great soloist is part of the compositional process itself since the musical ideas are so skeletal by design.  This is probably why samples go so far in the classical realm but often fall quite short when attempting to mock-up jazz.

Anyhow...

It used to be an inevitable fact that composers had to put their works into the hands of others for them to even be heard (poor Rachmaninov...).  Now, samples give us every increasing fidelity and flexibility in bypassing that limitation.  So what's the point of live performance in the era of recording and digital audio?

I think William hit the nail on the head:

I don't believe for a fraction of a second that most people who go to a live performance do so just because they want to hear the music when it's so much cheaper (and often more sonically pleasing) to listen to a recording.  They want to see the music performed, to bask in the glory of the performer(s), to share an experience with friends/family, to get drunk and dance (at a non-classical show), to take selfies and post them on instagram, etc.   

Now, lest I be mistaken for a misanthrope, I don't think any of the above are bad things.  I just think it's the reality of live music; the music is only a fraction of the whole experience.  It's why I personally don't enjoy going to most live performances.  I want to hear the music, not watch the performer, and I can almost always do this more effectively on a good stereo system listening to a well-mixed and edited recording.  I also find watching performers - especially singers and pianists - incredibly distracting, but that's probably just a quirk of mine...

This is where I think the analogy to theater/film breaks down.  If we see a movie, we're obviously going to see it so we can watch a story unfold.  If we go to see music, are we going to listen to the music of the composer?  To dance to it?  To study how a particular soloist performs a passage we're working on?  To enjoy room acoustics that can't be enjoyed any other way?  To flaunt our wealth and social status by posting our 7th row seats on facebook?

So what's the point of live performance? 

I think the answer is this: can live performance do something for the music and the experience of listening to said music that digital audio reproduction cannot?  If the answer is yes, then live performance is worth chasing down.  If the answer is no, then we are incredibly, incredibly lucky to live in a time where we have affordable access to technology that can realize our musical ideas to increasingly accurate degrees.

Jus' my 2 cents

- Sam

You're right, of course; Reaticulate is a DAW-specific fix.  I heartily agree and +1 your suggestion for VSL to add CC0/32 as a dimension controller in Synchron Player.

As a whole, I think the dimension concept in Synchron Player is fantastic, but it hasn't reached its full potential yet.  The way to do so, in my opinion, is to add more dimension controller options (like you suggested) as well as patch level editing capabilities (round robin control, time stretching, etc.).  If VSL did that, SP could easily out-do every other sample player out there.

- Sam

Rich,

Do you work with REAPER as your DAW?  If so, the Reaticulate script does exactly what you're talking about and more.  It hijacks program changes and essentially uses them as "macros" that can deliver up to 16 forms of MIDI input, be they keyswitches, CC values, etc.  It turns any convoluted mess of keyswitches and CC values into a single button press that sits neatly in a CC lane, polluting nothing and keeping everything nice and organized.  It's under constant development and is, quite frankly, the greatest thing that has ever happened to my VST-dominated workflow.

Here's the link to the site with more info.

Highly, highly suggest it if you're a REAPER user.  It renders Synchron (and any sampler's) articulation selection complexity completely moot.

- Sam

I've found that mixing Orchestral Bassi with Appassionata Bassi can effectively create a PerfLeg for the Appassionata Bassi.  If you Layer Orchestral pLeg with Appassionata Sus, but adjust the attack for the Sus to about 10-15 and the release to something like 45, it keeps the thickness of the appassionata section but makes room for the orchestral legato transitions to be heard without it sounding like two separate sections (assuming they're panned and mixed in the same position).

It doesn't open by default for me, either.  Interesting...

Oh, I think it sounds fine with the plate reverb. I was just curious why it was used (always learning), and your answer sums it up perfectly. I appreciate the info. Thanks!

- Sam

Dietz,

If I recall, I read somewhere that you had a hand in creating the pre-fab impulses and mixer settings for the Synchron-ized libraries.  I noticed in the SYNCHRON-ized Dimension Strings that, in the included mixer presets, the channels are sent to an aux plate reverb.  Why is that?  I was always under the impression plate reverbs tended to be artificial sounding and would interfere with the illusion of placement in a space.  Is it added to give the dry sound some thickness in order to match multi-mic'ed samples?

- Sam

I decided to go with the Synchron-ized Dimension Strings.  After diving in, I had some thoughts about its usage and would like to share them with anyone who might find it useful.  Perhaps someone else is trying to decide the same thing?

- Synchron Player is great.  It's intuitive, resizable, and easy to work with.  With more in-depth patch editing features and dimension control types, I think it could easily become the most flexible sample player out there.

- Set-up of custom presets for dimension strings seems to entail roughly the same amount of work that it would for VIPro.  Both involve creating individual patch configurations for every combination of players and playing modes (open string, regular, etc.) that you want.  That's a lot of dragging and dropping!  Fortunately, the presets cover everything in a very obvious way and the pre-fab groupings make perfect sense, so I don't really see I need to change much of anything.

Note: The way I like to work is to live-play a line in on one articulation (usually perf_legato) and then add in keyswitches manually after-the-fact.  With the exception of a few more intuitive set-ups like speed legato or certain sequence maps, I find that live playing with too many controllers is actually slower for me than clicking in articulations (as if I were editing a score with expression marks).  The Reaticulate script (for REAPER) makes complex combinations of keyswitches and what not a moot point, so given that tool the complexity of keyswitching in Synchron doesn't matter.

- Where Synchron makes Dim. Strings much easier to work with is in tree structure.  In VIPro, it's not possible to have one instance able to access every articulation in every conceivable grouping with every possible string playing mode AND have things like speed legato or velocity detected fp/sfz/sfzz; there simply aren't enough "layers" of selection.  In Synchron, there are 8 of them, all equally powerful.  This allows me to, from one instance, change sections, string playing modes, and articulations as well as create elaborate crossfades and control set-ups without having a gigantic mess of matrices.  That and the ability to automate the mixer levels (as well as add per-player EQ and other effects within one instance) make the Synchron version of Dim. Strings much less cumbersome to use for my personal workflow.  I'm glad I went with this one, so thank you all for the advice!

- The Enable slots on MIDI feature is brilliant. What a great way to save time AND RAM.

**********

As I stated above, a great benefit of the tree structure is the ability to create really deep, nuanced levels of selection that go well beyond what VI Pro can do.  However, that depth could be put to much greater use, in mu opinion, if VSL added more ways to control the Dimensions and patches.  I can see time-stretching easily being added to the EDIT tab alongside Humanize.  Additionally - barring my lack of knowledge as to how the software works - I don't see why interval mapping and sequence mapping couldn't go right along with Speed and Velocity in the available dimension controllers.  Interval mapping could be as it is in VI Pro, with slot 1 as the neutral patch, slot 2 as the UP interval and slot 3 as the DOWN interval.  Sequence mapping could simply cycle through the dimension slot by slot.  Both would require the dimension to be patch level, of course.  

Adding these features would allow set up of, say, a dimension where a staccato patch is shortened (via time stretching) the faster one plays, a legato where only the first note is marcato, an ostinato that doesn't require keyswitches to be copied over, etc.  And all this while still having 7 layers of articulation selection/organization to keep things nice and tidy.  It would be like the best of both worlds!

I'd say of the things I'd like to see ported from VIPro into Synchron, Time Stretching and the Round Robin Selection (the red circles) are the things that I think are quite crucial to getting the most out of certain patches.  I'm also missing how to turn of release samples...I'll look again though...

 

Anyhow, hope these rambling brainstreams help someone.  Thanks all for your advice, and have a good one.

- Sam

If it's all VI pro instruments (40-60 instances all in mirpro), then it will occasionally click here and there every 5 min or so (I think that's my entry level interface). Once I add kontakt, third party verbs, cfx, synths etc. there are clicks every min or so and I'll up it to 256. It's worth noting that I only use this buffer setting for live playing in parts. Once it's all settled and time for fine tuning, I crank it up to 2048.

I'm finding I live play less and less since integrating Reaticulate into my workflow, which is lovely - feels more like composing and less like DJing. I also use the "render take fx" function to get individual midi items into temporary WAV "takes" if a certain section is clicking too much.

Sure!

Presonus AudioBox USB interface w/ current drivers.  Buffer size is set to 128, and then a setting of "2" in the VEPro plugin.  I do not have Anticipative FX turned off.  VEPro 7 settings are at factory default.  I'm on Windows 10, optimized for audio, quad-core 4.5ghz (OC'ed), 64gb ddr3 ram, single machine.

Hope that helps.  Let me know if there's any more info you need.

- Sam

These solo voice VSTs are worth a glance:

https://realitone.com/products/realivoxladies

https://realitone.com/products/realivoxblue

One thing that irks me about most choir libraries is their inability to do melismatic lines coupled with legit syllables and consonants.  Since melismatic singing more or less defines the classical choir sound, I wonder why more libraries don't work on adding that functionality?  Currently, the only ones I know of that do so with acceptable legato are the Genesis Children's Choir and the Wotan/Freyja/Arva trio.

- Sam

This is a very good call on VSL's part to make dimension part of the special edition. Here's hoping the dim. Brass are next.

The cantabile patches sound beautiful in the demos!  Much respect.

I have a question, one that someone who has experience using the library hopefully has an answer to:

Are there any clips or demos of how the new standard legato transitions sound, specifically the fast variants?

I ask because ambient library legatos tend to suffer from "ambience phasing" that gets really ugly and mushy during quick runs and passages.  SyS, with its shorter tail and tighter sound, doesn't seem to be poised to suffer from the same issue.  However, the demos for SyS tend to be either dark and moody, sweeping and emotional, or playful and moderate tempo. 

In short, how does the library - with its new updates - fare with lightning quick string parts, such as the ultra fast string passages from Mendelssohn's Midsummer Night's Dream Overture?  The smooth ppp dynamics of the library interest me for the potential realization of these kinds of passages...

Thanks!

- Sam

Sway away!  It's why I made this post.

That is exactly what I plan on doing myself.  It's great to see that it works for you; this helps inform my decision quite...decisively...

Thanks!

- Sam

Perfect - all the info I need, thank you.  I look forward to diving into divisi.

As for the SY-zed App Strings, I'm considering picking them up given the re-edited non-vib legato and sustain patches.  I was a fan of how they sounded on the demo page.  Plus, it would be a useful learning exercise to try and match the Synchron IRs with the dry VI apps in MiR, see how much I can figure out through trial and error...

Anyhow, have a good one!

- Sam

By Synchron Philosophy, I'm assuming you mean the new method of keyswitching and volume matching with other synchron products?  I'm asking because (and please correct me if I'm wrong), the SYN versions of Appassionata and Chamber strings both have a few articulations from VI left out (FX from Appassionata, Zigane legato from Chamber).   Are there any articulations left out from the VI Dimension Strings or merged in such a way that they're not available as individual patches?  From screenshots and videos, it didn't seem like it, but sometimes it can be hard to tell...

This occurred to me thirty minutes after I posted.  Derp.  Problem solved :)

Completely understandable; your job is not an easy one and I have great respect for the way you go about it.  Quite honestly, time stretching is the only one that I think makes a sizable difference (when coupled with dynamics patches), but life can go on without it :)  Consider it a feature request, then, I suppose.

As always, thanks for the prompt and helpful response.

- Sam

Thanks, Ben.  As always, your advice is much appreciated and helps me out a great deal.  I'm leaning towards the SYN version, in all honesty...but I'll have to mull it over some more.

- Sam

Due to the 30% sale this month, I will 100% be buying Dimension Strings I thru III.

The question is: which one?  Synchronized or VI?

There seem to be pros and cons to each...I think?  I'm hoping that both Paul and owners of one or both of the libraries could chime in with answers to the following questions as well as general advice to help me decide which to buy.  It would be much appreciated!

Essentially, I'm enamored with the flexibility of VI Pro and the set-up tweaking required of that player is totally fine for me when it comes to solo instruments and unison ensembles.  However - unless there's something I'm missing - it looks like a truly herculean task to set up custom presets and matrixes with Dimension Strings in VI Pro, especially taking the Force Strings patches into account, even with the Ctrl-Alt-W function.  But I do enjoy the flexibility and features of VI Pro that Synchron doesn't have.  I'm quite on the fence about this one...

My questions:

1) First, I want to make sure I'm understanding clearly how the library works/is used.

My understanding is that you can either:

• Use each player in a separate instance and track for maximum flexibility
• Organize the player's patches into Desks/Groups/etc. per instance for more expediency and quick divisi. (Or use the entire ensemble)

To do option #2 in VI Pro, you have to create a matrix or preset of matrixes in which each cell has the appropriate player patches loaded into the slots.  So, Violin Desk 1's matrix or preset of matrixes would have each individual cell loaded with Player 1 and Player 2's respective articulations in the slot editor.

To do option #2 in Synchron Player, you use a keyswitch to switch between Groups, Desks, and Players; the articulation patches will then automatically adapt to the appropriate players.  So, if I select Player 1, only Player 1 will play whatever articulation I choose.  However, if I select Desk 1, Player 1 AND Player 2 will play the articulation I choose.

Is all the above correct?  

If so, it means that Synchron Player is *massively* easier to set up groups/desks with since you don't have to assign each individual cell with each individual patch - Synchron Player will do all the assigning for you in realtime.  But that leads me to my next question:

2) Can you edit what players are in groups/desks in Synchron Player (i.e make one group of 5 and one group of 3 violins)?  It seems clear that you can do this in VI Pro (however time consuming it may be), but it wasn't clear to me if you could do this in the SYN-zed version from watching the walkthrough videos.

3) I've had it confirmed that if you disable the IR in Synchron you get the panned, dry samples.  This is very important to me because I don't always want to use DS in the Synchron Stage (In fact, my main reason for consideration of the SYN-zed version is the easier workflow and in-instance automation).  Are the dry samples that are IR-bypassed the same exact samples (aside from tweaks, volume balancing, etc) or are there any left out from the VI version or that have been stream-lined in a way that make them not accessible on an articulation-selection level?

4) Does MIR Pro recognize the SYN-zed Dimension Strings the same way it would recognize the VI Dimension Strings (i.e. apply character presets automatically, put it in the appropriate MIRx locations, etc.)?

5) Paul, are you at liberty to verify if any of the following will be added to the Synchron Player (or a Synchron Player Pro version) in the future?

• Time-Stretching 
• Interval Mapping
• Sequence Mapping
• Auto-Voicing (for "auto divisi")

 

Any insight/help/recommendations would be so, so helpful.  

Thanks!

- Sam

I appreciate the tip on subbing low brass with CB clarinet for variety. Very helpful to a neophyte orchestrator such as myself.

And the dubstep clarinet (dubinet? claristep?) is clearly a weapon of mass destruction.  :)

- Sam

It's a bit hidden on the site, but here's their support email:

Derp, I got mirx and mirpro mixed up. Yes, you are correct.

I'm finding natural volume in mirpro to be a very valuable learning tool.

It's worth noting that the natural volume feature of MIRpro volume balances the instruments as well.