One of the things that separates the VSL full solo double-bass from the competition is its wealth of articulations. For solo playing, one of the key articulations for the double-bass is the natural harmonics, something required by many of the solo concertos written for the instrument. Also, for solo playing the transposition trick works reasonably well for mimicing the use of solo tuning A, E, B, F#, instead of the usual G, D, A, E.

Note that I was trained as a classical double-bassist.

At this point, I rarely post.  I am more of a church composer/hobby user, not a "high end" user.  My budget for samples is very, very limited.  Up to now I have lived in the land of VSL.  What is currently going on concerns me.  On the one hand, there is that massive negative/hostile thread against SyS on "that other forum."  Here, there appears to be - at times - an almost equally hostile thread in favor of it.  To someone who has to spend money on samples with great care, neither thread is helpful.

At one time I was a participant in the Sonar community.  As things spiraled downward, negative reactions towards any criticism increased significantly.  Fahl5 may prove to be right, I don't know.  What I do know is that when companies fail to take justified complaints (note the use of "justified") seriously, those companies tend to suffer financially, as the market reacts.  To me, there is no other company out there that has been able to do what VSL has done.

But so far SyS seems more of a "miss" than a "hit."  That is not a direct conern.  No company is perfect.  The issue is how VSL will handle the criticism/concerns.  Following the "Cakewalk/Sonar" model in that regard would not be wise.  There are solid reasons to hope that SyS will reach VSL standards, given VSL's track record.  As for now, if I were to purchase another VSL string library, it would likely be AP strings.  SyS seems to much of a question mark at this point.

Now that Steinberg has officially announced they are ending VST 2 support in October 2018, is this going to be a problem?

As others have said, the Special Editions are a good place to start.  If at all possible get the Plus portions as well, as the plus portions (for SE 1 and SE 2) add some additional key articulations.  SE 1 provides the basics for a core classical period type orchestra, while SE 2 adds additional instruments more akin to a late Romantic period.  For what it sounds like you want to be doing, you will probably want both SE 1 and SE 2.

Especially with the SE libraries, getting VI Pro will really help.  WIth the stretch function in VI Pro, you can create a number of variations on the existing articulations to give greater variety.

Depending on budget, another option is to go with SE, and also add AP strings, or depending on interests, possibly chamber strings instead.  In the long run, the full libraries have a wealth of options not included in SE.  However the sound of SE is very good.  Many on another forum consider the VSL SE woodwinds to be all one really needs, and adding a full strings library fills out that most important section (with the full libraries it is helpful, if possible, to get both the standard and the extended portions - yes it does get confusing).

I also used to use EWQLSO Gold and later Platinum in the old Kontakt version.  You will find that the VSL libraries are much more consistent in terms of articulations, and the VSL software is outstanding - you can configure your instruments/patches however you want.  There will be a bit of a learning curve.  Generally, for those new to VSL, it is best to start with the free VI, and once familiar with that, then to upgrade to VI Pro.

The sound of VSL is very different from EWQLSO Gold, and having both will give you much more flexibility with your sonic options.

I don't own Dimension Brass, so I cannot answer your question directly.

But, have you considered your current setup in making your decision?  WIth MIR 24, you can only use 24 instruments at once.  If you get Dimentsion Brass, potentially, most of your 24 MIR channels will be used just for Dimension Brass.  It would seem to me that to make full use of Dimension Brass you would need to consider upgrading to the full MIR Pro, to get around the number of instruments limitation that exists in MIR 24.

Just a thought, as you consider making your decision.

Although the computers I use are now relatively old, they were purchased from ADK.  I was pleased with their customer service and found them to be most helpful in fixing a problem when a motherboard subsequently failed.

It has been a few years though.

Hi.  I also happen to still be using Sonar 8.5.3, although it is on a different computer than my Vienna software, so a different setup from yours.  Since Sonar 8.5.3 is fully compatible with Windows 7, I wouldn't think it would cause any conflicts (though one never knows).

Regarding question #1: using an SSD speeds up load times, for both EW and VSL, but that is not the issue being raised regarding the use of an SSD for samples.  The difference between VSL and EW comes with VSL's Pro software: for VSL libraries only, when you use an SSD, you can set smaller buffer sizes than those required with conventional hard drives.  Using smaller buffer sizes allows more samples to be loaded into the same amount of RAM.

On one level, the question is impossible to really answer, hence why you haven't found one.  As everyone writes differently and edits parts differently, there is simply no easy answer.

More information would also be helpful.  Are you seeking to run VSL full libraries, or VSL SE libraries?  The SE libraries are much less demanding than the full libraries, and you could probably load a fair amount of samples in 4 gigs (SE 1, 1+, 2 and 2+ fill up about 8 gigs of RAM with all patches loaded).  However, with the full libraries, plus those of other companies, having only 4 gigs of memory would be your first bottleneck.  It is not uncommon to have 32 gigs of ram on a computer where many samples will be loaded.

What speed is your hard drive, and how many hard drives do you have?  If your hard drive is 5400 rpm, that slow speed would cause problems.  Also, if you are trying to run your o/s, recording, and streaming samples from one drive, that would be a significant bottleneck.  If using one computer, most often 3 hard drives are used: one for o/s and programs, one for recording audio, and one for streaming samples.

In addition, as you mention, beyond a certain point, more processing power is required as well, to run all the various processes.  In general, sample streaming requires ram, fast hard drives, and a higher cpu core speed.  For running multiple effects, and audio processing, having more cpu cores is more important than the speed of the cores.

Note that using SSDs for sample streaming is also helpful: samples load much faster, more smaples can be streamed, and with VSL, buffer sizes can be lowered, which helps conserve memory usage.

It looks like you are missing SE Vol. 4 that includes special woodwinds (and brass) and the VSL choir. 

A brief follow-up: Although I still have more testing to do in order to isolate the problem to a specific device, general testing indicates that the problem is not VSL related, but hardware related, as by using a different routing for the MIDI data/parts in question, they play back correctly.

It actually is not hard to do.  In your sequencer (or notation program) you transpose the entire part down (or up) 1/2 step (whole step if using Special Editions).  Using you pitch wheel, in your sequencer, you then raise the entire part up 1/2 step, so the part sounds at the correct pitch.  You do need to make sure that each matrix is set to respond to the pitch wheel data.  It should not be necessary to do any adjusting of the individual articulations.

Thanks for the quick response and for the ideas.  Unfortunately, if I disconnect everything MIDI, there won't be any playback.  I can add that I use MIR Pro/VE Pro standalone, and I have been transmitting MIDI from my old XP computer, running Finale 2005b.  I do have some options for testing different MIDI interfaces and cables, which seems like a good next step.  The computer running MIR Pro/VE Pro is a W7 machine.  I am getting this glitch while working on creating key switches within Finale, something I do prior to exporting the file to a sequencer to create and map out controller data.

As to why I am running such old software from Finale, due to RL eye issues, Finale made a visual display change to the program in 2006 that makes any version made since 2005 extremely difficult for me to use.

At present, I don't think this is a MIR Pro problem, although it is odd that the glitch seems to impact only certain instruments across various projects, and the harp part in question doesn't even include any keyswitches.  But again, sometimes everything plays back correctly.

I will post again later after running more tests.

Thanks again.

I have recently been experiencing playback glitches that I can't trace.  Sometimes, but not always, in a current pieces I am working on, the orchestra cellos will play back a whole step too low.  I have been having the same issue with a chamber piece and the playback of a harp part.  I am not using the pitch wheel on these pieces, nor am I using any transposition tricks.

This is a new problem and I am at a loss as to what may be causing it.  As far as I can tell I don't have any odd controller information being sent.  I have thought it might be a MIDI cable not fully seated in its connector, or perhaps one of my MIDI interfaces is going bad (yes, I know, a very old style setup).

I have also tried deleting the orchestra cello part within MIR Pro, and recreating the matrix from scratch.  That has seemingly made no difference.  I have also tried reassigning a different MIDI channel for the part, and that seems to help. 

Any other ideas of what might be going wrong?  Am I likely on the right track thinking it could be MIDI interface related?

Thanks for your ideas.

Using an SSD for VSL libraries has many advantages, from the number of samples that can be streamed to being able to load smaller portions of the samples into RAM (with VI Pro only IIRC).  Using an SSD is particularly beneficial when using the full libraries of VSL.  However, for SE, the need is far less, and if your budget is tight, that is one place you can save some money.  If you were purchasing a full library rather than an SE library, then an SSD would be of significantly greater importance.

For SE, an SSD is not necessary, a 7200 rpm hard drive will work fine.  SE 1, 1+, 2 and 2+ combined require far fewer resources than the full libraries, and fully loaded, will only take up about 8 gigs of RAM.

Generally, when running sample libraries, you do need multiple hard drives, keeping the sample libraries off the system drive, as doing so helps overall performance.  In a typical music computer setup (where a separate computer for running sample libraries is not used) one drive is used for the o/s and programs, one drive for sample libraries, and one drive for recording.

DaddyO has given you some very good answers.

As for #6, I would add the following: which do you think you will find more useful: the additional articulations of "+" or the additional instruments of SE 2?

For writing divided string parts, the most common VSL approach prior to Dimension Strings - and still in use for those of us who do not own DS - is to layer the orchestra strings and the chamber strings.  When a divided part is desired, the parts are then split between the orchestra strings and the chamber strings.

If you are looking for a larger, late-romantic period sized orchestra, then having SE 2 would be a benefit as it adds key woodwinds and brass common to that period.

Also, VI Pro would enable you to create additional variations for your existing articulations, something that could be of major importance if you do not purchase SE 1+.

Also, how many inputs/outputs will you need?  Are you going to be recording in stereo, or are you looking to do 5.1 surround?  What would be "best" depends on what you will actually need.

What can be said at this point is that for driver stability the RME line is a known good thing, but those cards are not on the "budget" side of things.

In terms of my own sample library experience, I went from GPO to EWQLSO to VSL SE to VSL Cube.  Of those libraries, I probably found EWQLSO to be the most frustrating.  While it had better sound than GPO, the baked-in reverb was a real problem (Platinum with the three mic positions was a bit better than Gold in that regard).  The incomplete range of the strings I found to be a problem.  I also found that some styles of writing did not work with their strings - writing to the samples was an issue.  I have not had those issues with VSL - even VSL SE.  As for Play, I did not care for it at all (I had EWQLSO Gold in Kontakt, Platinum in Play).

I will echo what others have said: you do not want to even try to run their new Hollywood series on anything other than a new high-end computer.  VSL SE, OTOH, will fit quite nicely on a very mid-range computer.  As for sound, IMO, VSL SE is far superior to the older EWQLSO.

However, the key is to find what works for you.

As Daddy-O suggested, do check out that other forum.

A few months ago VSL changed the way they handle discounts.  You can start by getting a porton of a bundle, and still gain a bunde discount at the point that you purchase the rest of the libraries tht are part of that bundle.

As for where to start, it all depends on the type of music you desire to write.  SE1 will provide the instruments of a "classical" ochestra. SE 2 adds additional instrument that will get you to a late Romantic period orchestra, and allow for much more tone color variation.

If you can also afford the + portions of SE1 and SE2, that will provide additional important articulations.

Once you become familiar with the free VI, getting VI Pro will help to fill in some of the gaps in SE, as you can use VI Pro to create additional articulations.  As has already been suggested, consider MIR X as well.

I would also be inclined to suggest going with more sounds.  While MIR 24 probably would be enough when paired with SE 1, adding SE 2 instruments into your compositions within MIR 24 could prove problematic.

Adding SE 2 would provide considerable additional options with your composing.  For example, you could more easily do divided string parts, layering orchestra and chamber string sections, and splitting them out as needed.  The additional woodwind and brass instruments would also be useful.  However nice the software tools are, if you don't have the actual instrument samples, the net benefit of the software drops.

Remember too, if you purchase a version of MIR, you also need to buy at least one hall, since the halls are no longer included within MIR, but are now separate.

The 5400 rpm hard drive will almost certainly be a problem, as its speed is too slow to handle sample streaming well.  With SE, you would be fine with a 7200 rpm drive, but for sample streaming SSDs have significant advantages.

If you can afford to upgrade your ram, that would be good to do long-term.  You might as well see how far you can get with your four gigs first, though.

Welcome to the forum.

1: I am not aware of any separate SE strings bundle.  I believe you would noeed to purchase each strings library separately.  It would be worth emailing VSL sales just to make sure.

2: Assuming you have a 32 bit o/s you only have access to something like 3.5 gigs of RAM IIRC.  If you wanted to load all of the samples in SE 1, 1 Plus, 2, and 2 Plus, you would need 8 gigs of RAM (and those four libraries would run quite well in 8 gigs).  If you are only interested in SE strings and SE percussion, you probably could get by with the lesser RAM, but you would have almost no room for future expansion.  If you are also running your sequencer and everything else on that one laptop, you could reach your limit fairly quickly. 

The SE libraries are very RAM friendly, but quality sample libraries still use a lot of RAM.  However, if the drive you will be storing the samples on is an SSD, with VI Pro 2, you can reduce the buffer size when streaming from an SSD, and that could be of some real help, as reducing the buffer size uses less RAM.

You will do quite fine with the full SE bundle.  You can get the full libraries for individual sections later as you need them.

Best wishes for your success with VSL.  You won't regret your purchase.

Given your interests, you may find the SE Complete Bundle to be enough for your needs.  Even with SE, you will find that you have a much higher finished sound quality than with GPO and the like (I was a GPO user back in the day myself).

The other thing to consider getting is VI Pro.  VI Pro adds a great deal of flexibility to the free VI player, and the "stretch" function can be used to create additional articulations that will help fill in the gaps of what is offered in SE.  There are many other advantages in VI Pro as well.  Generally, it is suggested to master the free VI first, and then upgrade to VI Pro.

The SE libraries do require far less computer power and less ram.  SE 1, 1 Plus, 2, and 2 Plus combined will fit quite nicely into a mere 8 gigs of ram.

One advantage with VSL is their discount structure.  If you do start with SE Bundle and later decide to go to the full Cube, your Cube price will be discounted.

Like you, my interests are at the hobby level, though more traditional symphonic/chamber than pop-orchestral.  In the VSL world, I started with SE - the old version of 1, 1 Plus, 2 and 2 Plus. I then went to a mix of full libraries + SE, and recently to the full Cube.  There is no question that I prefer the full Cube, even though I am a bit limited due to my computer specs.

If your budget is tight, I would suggest starting with SE.  If you could afford it, going directly to the Cube would be strongly worth considering.  Running the Cube requires far more computer power, and ram.  You don't list your computer specs, but having 32 gigs of ram for the whole cube would be strrongly suggested.

Last, one of the biggest differences for me between SE and the full libraries is the percussion in SE vs. the full library percussion.  There is a wealth of percussion in the full library (standard + extended) that is simply not available in SE.