@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.