202,871 users have contributed to 43,311 threads and 259,531 posts.
In the past 24 hours, we have 1 new thread(s), 9 new post(s) and 71 new user(s).
I really don't understand when people say they don't like the VSL strings (or other instruments) .. what's not to like about them.
It's pretty simple for me. I just haven't been impressed enough with the sound quality I've heard from material done with vienna. No question the range of articulations is phenomenal. MIR seems to get it the closest but that requires a ton of power and is expensive to get sound quality closer to how other libraries can sound with minimal tweaking.
Again, it all depends on the sound one is after. If one is after a "real" traditional orchestral and/or especially a chamber music sound, IMO, VSL is as good as, or better than, anything else that is out there. If one is after a "Hollywood" sound, a sound that remains "in vogue" that is arguably a different question.
The number of articulations VSL provides is vital to achieve realism. For all its excellent qualities, IMO, the lack of articulations in LASS is a critical weakness for my purposes, and it is therefore not a good choice for me. Does that mean LASS is a "bad" library? Obviously, no.
For me, as a strings player, the number of articulations in VSL comes the closest of any library to reproducing what I actually can do with a bow. Is it "perfect"? No. The way certain articulations end I find less than ideal. But, nevertheless, an intimacy of sound is possible in VSL that HS, etc., cannot produce - one is left awash in the "Hollywood" sound. OTOH, if one is after a strictly "Hollywood" sound HS could be - and has proven to be - of great use. The point is simply that one needs to use sounds that are designed for one's purpose.
It seems to me that often these types of threads degenerate into "If I like it = good, if I don't like it = bad". What is easy to forget is that the musical world extends far beyond one's own personal taste and needs.
For example, personally, I have no need or desire to use synth sounds. Does that mean I will start bashing, to cite one case, Omnisphere, as a useless library, because it doesn't do what I need? No.
Anyway, just my $.02.
@noldar12 said:
But, nevertheless, an intimacy of sound is possible in VSL that HS, etc., cannot produce - one is left awash in the "Hollywood" sound.
Even with the close mics? Most of the newer libraries aren't that wet even with the "surround" mics, and I can't imagine how anyone would describe the close mics as "awash" with anything. Have you actually used any of these other libraries or heard examples of the close mics without reverb added?
I'm not disagreeing with your choice of sample libraries, I agree with you that different people have different priorities and taste. I'm just a bit puzzled by the impression some seem to have that VSL is the only library that includes closer/drier mics and that all the other ones are swamped in big wet giant halls.
What exactly do people define as the "Hollywood" sound? TRON 2? Benjamin Button? Inception? If that's it then almost any library with the right engineering can produce acceptable, or good results. However, if we include - as we should - Harry Potter I, II, III, Star Wars Prequel Saga, How to Train Your Dragon, Lord of the Rings I, II, III, etc., then I haven't heard anywhere near in breadth demos from any library that can cover the scope that the VSL can. Of course ideally one will take the best from all worlds, but only VSL from what I've heard has had the range to do Blue Danube, La Mer, String Quartet Op.59, Fanfare for the Common Man, Pictures, and I'd like to hear Berg's Three Pieces for Orchestra by some other developer. And I mean that; if someone else can do all those as/more convincingly I want to know!
If the discussion is which is the best library to do arpeggiators and pads, it has really taken too long already...
@Errikos said:
What exactly do people define as the "Hollywood" sound? TRON 2? Benjamin Button? Inception? If that's it then almost any library with the right engineering can produce acceptable, or good results. However, if we include - as we should - Harry Potter I, II, III, Star Wars Prequel Saga, How to Train Your Dragon, Lord of the Rings I, II, III, etc., then I haven't heard anywhere near in breadth demos from any library that can cover the scope that the VSL can.
Sure, but my point was that before you get to the 'production' stage of a soundtrack where positioning, tails, and even the company's original recordings matter, you first have to be able to sequence the actual music; and I'm saying, is there another library out there that can accommodate the variety needed for the scores I mentioned, and sound as/more convincing? The reason I put those up there is because a lot of people don't even consider them. They are probably just thinking of Inception and TRON 2, and perhaps those sound better on LASS or HS (the chugga-chaggas), because that's the "music" they wish to make, looking forward to scoring TRON 3 on their iPhones. That's personal choice, but I wouldn't compare these products based on such a limited use of their potential.
@hetoreyn said:
I really don't understand when people say they don't like the VSL strings (or other instruments) .. what's not to like about them. They have the most controllable, and realistic playback you're ever likely to get in a sample library. Over the last several years there's one immutable thing I've learned.
My Virtual instruments performance is only as good as how I write it to be.
Okay .. in some cases that means you've got a lot of hard work if you want something to sound good .. but when've you've learned how to use your tools properly that's hardly a big deal. Personally I LOVE the sound of the VSL. The strings are expressive, realistic and extremely controllable. Between Velocity xfading and cell x-fading you can achieve almost anything.
I've heard demos with Hollywood strings and with LASS and frankly I've been unimpressed by the realism when compared with VSL. Of course I will concede that it may simply have been the composers fault for not doing a better job with the LASS and HS. I've heard just as many bad renderings with VSL .. Hell I've recorded plenty myself 😛 ... But my point is that any tool take time to learn to use properly.
Take reverb for instance. Man I have spent so many frickin' man hours trying to master this beast. And only nowadays ..after years of experiments .. do I feel like I start to get somewhere with it.
Here's a good analogy. Take the CGI program 'Poser'. It lets you simulate people in 3D .. gets used a lot for fantasy .. (and porn :P), and anyone can buy it. I've seen lots of poser generated pics that look exactly like a CGI character .. absolutely nothing like a true photo real flesh and blood person. But now and again I see a Poser image that is exceptional. And I can usually tell which artist did them because you know these few people have spent years learning how to texture, light, and shade their creations. They know the things to avoid, they know what doesn't look real and what does .. because of experience.
And it's the same with a decent mock-up in virtual orchestra. So many people want a complete out-of-the-box, press the button and everything is perfect straight away, kind of experience. I'm not saying that working with a sample library should be hard ... but I personally like the fact that if I have a recording that sounds really good .. it's because it reflects years of learning and understanding that went into producing it in the first place, and the library was versatile enough to let me do whatever I wanted.
With such a versatile library like VSL it amazes me that there can be negative reactions to it .. you can do anything with it .. if you know how!
I didn't want to post anything more on this overdone thread, but this is a great statement and I totally agree with all the points hetoreyn makes. The sound of the VSL strings is something I truly love and am inspired by.
In order to represent the strings, which have always been called "the backbone of the orchestra" - you have to do what real strings do which is a huge, wide-ranging number of different articulations and styles, NOT JUST ONE KIND OF SOUND. Other libraries are focuisng on one type of sound - "Hollywood" or L.A. or "Session" or whatever. This is actually very misleading, because a real studio string ensemble consists of players who may do studio work but also play in chamber or symphony orchestras. They are in other words the kind of ensemble that VSL has created. They can play any of the huge number of expressive articulations and styles that strings have at their command. VSL has focused on doing an exhaustive, methodically organized recording of every type of string sound from solo to small tight chamber to medium sized orchestral to huge "Hollywood" style Appassionata strings ("Hollywood" really ought to be called "Berlioz Strings" though nobody would buy it.) In essence, VSL strings are actually many libraries, not one, rolled into a single unified interface that is really intuitive, playable and logical in its design.
Mike, your point is well taken. I am going off of demos, as I absolutely do not have the $$$ to buy every string library out there, nor the computer power to run them.
Going from the HS demos, large and lush is what is being pushed. Can one do RVW's Fantasia with that? Sure. Would I want to do a Vivaldi chamber sound with that? No. Even if it was not awash with reverb, it would still be far too big. Does HS sound like a traditional orchestra? Again, no (at least not from the demos). IMO, the poster who suggested "Berlioz Strings" had it about right. The Hollywood sound is simply one version of an orchestra. Sometimes traditional fits better, sometimes something along the lines of the Orchestra of the Age of Enlightenment or chamber is better, and sometimes, solo strings.
Within VSL one has four very different string libraries: solo, chamber, orchestral, and AP. The sound of the attacks in each library is quite different, as is the overall sound. Comparing HS to AP? IMO, that is a fair comparison. Comparing HS to all of VSL's strings? That is another matter entirely.
@William said:
VSL has focused on doing an exhaustive, methodically organized recording of every type of string sound from solo to small tight chamber to medium sized orchestral to huge "Hollywood" style Appassionata strings ("Hollywood" really ought to be called "Berlioz Strings" though nobody would buy it.)
I would. Immediately. Nothing against Berlioz Strings in my book 😉
@domcicchetti said:
I just purchased Vienna to run on an IMac with PT9. Is there a website to access and download instrument set ups that are playable and realistic? DC
You should visit Beat Kaufmann's sites:
www.beat-kaufmann.com (Tutorials, etc.)
www.orchester.beat-kaufmann.com (Musik mit Samples)
EW=all your music is confined to their space.
VSL=you build the room.
I have a very important part from EW, namely the choirs, but I can't imagine using them for orchestra. I have Ra and Dark side, great stuff, but I'm not building a room in my mix because the samples aren't tight. VSL rocks in that regard, and software, too...
I have to make EW SC the first point in my mix because of the noise. Never happens with VSL. I'm sure Hollywood is the same, I would guess.
Shawn
@William said:
Well I see you brought back this assinine thread from the cybernetic abyss it richly deserves.
Yeah, I am the one responsible for this unfortunate event :-)
With that Berlioz Strings crack I meant that he was the original Hollywood sound, conducting thousands of musicians with a sword. Now that is one of the rare conductors I would respect.
[/quote]Did he really do this or is this a legend? (I mean the sword part, not the thousand musicians part (that one, crazy as it is, is actually true)).
No one needs 1,000 musicians. You could get the same effect putting a Stylophone through a chorus pedal.
Well I read the Memoirs where he talks about conducting huge forces in an outdoor concert, though maybe not a full thousand. It is probably an overstatement like calling Mahler's 8th "Symphony of a Thousand."
btw people here seem to hate Berlioz. Why? I love the Symphonie Fantastique and Harold in Italy to name a just a couple. Is Berlioz out of fashion or something? That is probably why I like him. Nowadays it's all Mahler. Forget Bruckner, forget Berlioz. Well not me! I like all Romantic musical maniacs. Bruckner with his maniacal counting echoed in the frenzied repetitions of his symphonic fortissimos, Berlioz with his luridly programmatic, hallucinatory depictions of morbid artists. How could anyone not LOVE that?
@dagmarpiano said:
No one needs 1,000 musicians. You could get the same effect putting a Stylophone through a chorus pedal.
Indeed you don't, but it is an adrenaline high. I have done a little conducting in my time, and I would be in great awe of having 120 instrumentalists and two choirs and soloists following my sword... Well, I am now in preliminary discussions on being commissioned to write a huge oratorio; I don't altogether envy whomever will have to conduct the thing if it ever materializes...
@William said:
Well I read the Memoirs where he talks about conducting huge forces in an outdoor concert, though maybe not a full thousand. It is probably an overstatement like calling Mahler's 8th "Symphony of a Thousand."
btw people here seem to hate Berlioz. Why? I love the Symphonie Fantastique and Harold in Italy to name a just a couple. Is Berlioz out of fashion or something? That is probably why I like him. Nowadays it's all Mahler. Forget Bruckner, forget Berlioz. Well not me! I like all Romantic musical maniacs. Bruckner with his maniacal counting echoed in the frenzied repetitions of his symphonic fortissimos, Berlioz with his luridly programmatic, hallucinatory depictions of morbid artists. How could anyone not LOVE that?
Who hates Berlioz? Don't one dare heap abuse on Berlioz here. The man had to suffer enough of this nonsense when he was alive.
If someone even starts with this, I'll do the best Berlioz mockup yet just to make them angry. And yes, that's a threat...