dorremifaso, bogdan, el-russo

Thanks for all your compliments [:)] [:$]

A lot of success

Beat

Very nice, Beat. Those Chamber strings can't be stopped! What  great library they are.

Mahlon

That does sound very good.  The celli soli sounded a bit too uniform and a little MIDI-ish.  But the overall performance is amazingly good. 

@William said:

...The celli soli sounded a bit too uniform and a little MIDI-ish... 

Hi William

That's because of the missing Hermode-Tuning... 😉

I agree with you.

1. Unfortunately I couldn't use VIpro with the humanizer because the end user doesn't own it.

2. Further, here we have the evidence that we need a lot more different sounding samples of the same type.

    Our "fate" is, that we often have just one articulation for a certain situation which comes closest to the reality.

    If we have 100 times the same situation as we have it with the Bach accomapniment we need to take 100 times the same sample - that's quasi midi.

3. This performance here has no tempo variation because the end user will do the variations himself.

    So the simple Cello parts (accomaniment of the soloviolin with the cellos) sound very inflexible at the moment, yes.

Beat

Hi Beat,

Compliments for your “good old” Chambers version!

@Beat Kaufmann said:

One last thing: Sometimes I think it would be a great thing to have around 3 different master pieces (reverences) which every Library has to play. I believe that such a testing system could uncover the weakness of every Library. What do you think?

I always have been quite interested in comparing libraries on their weak and strong points. Inspired by your suggestion/question hereabove,  I have made a different version with different libraries. I have tried to make it in the baroque performance tradition with not too much vibrato.

I have made two versions (with the same librairies btw):
1. Strings with only the cembalo, no solo violin.
2. Full version: all strings, solo violin (!!) and cembalo (which is the Grimaldi of Pianoteq btw)

Just for the sake of comparison: I did not use any VSL here. Stage positioning according to baroque style: the continuo parts Vlc., cembalo and solo centered in front; second level vl.1-vl.2-vla.

If interested in the choice of libraries, please let me know. Beat, I hope you like it!

Best,

Erik

Hi Erik

Good idea, to publish the piece with another library. Thanks for your excellent job, Erik and for doing this for us.

I'm looking forward to know which library you used...

I've updatet my BWV 1041 with the solo violin as well for a better comparison.

Unfortunately I have not the time for doing it till the end of the piece and also for playing the violin in a perfect way.

So there are still some "hicks" which should be improved and the piece will fade out...

As you mentioned: We don't have enough samples without vibrato with the VSL-Library.

Full version: all Strings, solo violin and cembalo

Stagepositions with my mix

Front: Solo Violin / Behind it: Viols1-Vliolas-Cellos-CembaloViols2

Have fun. Let's unravel the secret about your libraries later on. Maybe some others will guess first as well.

All the best

Beat

Don't get mad at me as I am not trying to be obnoxious but feel that criticisms should be made if something is posted, not just constant praise. 

The difference between these two Erik performances on the one hand, and the Beat Kaufman/VSL on the other, is mind-boggling.  The Erik one is instantly obvious as digital samples, with little definition or clarity, and almost no expression.  It is not horrible notation type transcription - it is better than that - but it is completely artificial sounding.  What is that lower sound?  Is that a cello? Is sounds like a synth.  Also the harpsichord or cembalo or whatever it is - it is difficult to tell - sounds really bad. 

The VSL version is astoundingly real and totally expressive, almost exactly like a live performance.  It is a totally convincing  proof of how samples can truly do an artistic performance of complex music, despite what many classical and recording musicians continue to say - because all they have heard is the  Garritan orchestra or whatever lesser library was used on this particular performance.   Please post what it is.  I am curious now.   Also, not trying to be irritating, just being honest.  It is not the performance by Erik, which seems very musical, but  the samples and programming that  I am reacting against. 

Hi Beat,

The orchestra: Session Strings Pro, the solo violin: Spitfire (I didn't have much time getting to know this product better since it was released this week).

Beat, nice version you have made with the solo violin now! Sounds good!

The lack of clarity may be a result of reverb settings or even the miking of the instruments: VSL is always very close miked, Session strings obviously not. I haven't made my versions to promote whatever library btw, but I have tried to make the best out of it.

I frequently also use many samples of VSL (see the Britten contribution, Young Personal's Guide to the Orchestra, from my part), but it remains a challenge to see what other libraires do with the same basic midi information, plus of course all sound plugins afterwards. I don't have the feeling of what has been labeled here as a completely artificial product btw. So I am eager to know what other people think.

Best,

Erik

 A specific thing I dislike about the session strings "pro" version is how the difference between the quick legato and spiccato/staccato sixteenths or eights in the pattern of two slurred followed by two staccato is almost undetectable. I was listening for the difference between articulations and could hardly hear them, whereas in the VSL versions, they are very clearly delineated and sound just like those played live.  Those fast clear articulations are  essential in an allegro baroque piece.

Hi,

To inform you.

Updated (and slower) version of the Violin Concerto, part1:

1. Added: more articulations as available in Session Strings Pro
2. Added contrabass support in the continuo
3. Other cembalo + further editing notes
4. Solo violin part: further editing
5. Different stage postioning
6. Other verb, EQ, compression etc.

1. Full version: all strings, solo violin and cembalo
2. Strings with only the cembalo, no solo violin.

And no....it is not "out of the box" btw.: I don't know any library as such that sounds OK to me.

Hello

I'm trying to figure out what is going on with this sound.  I "reoriented" myself by immediately switching to the Beat Kaufman version from yours and it verified the reaction I keep getting.  It is strange - the sound of the Session strings and the Spitfire start to become unreal and weird and electronic after a while.  This does not happen with the VSL at all, which continues to sound very real and espressivo and in fact seems to get MORE real the more you listen (and hear the detailed articulations, vibrato, changes within notes, etc.).  I don't think it is your mix but it is the sample recordings themselves, which have somehow drained the musical life out of the notes.  This does not happen with VSL - they always seem alive. 

I have to add that you are doing a great job musically, and it is just the sound of those samples that grates on me.  I think if you were using VSL your performance would be excellent. The overall musical impression is being severely affected by these other samples which simply do not give an impression of any reality, either acoustic or musical, to me.  Sorry to be so omnipresent on this thread and I will stop posting as it is probably very irritating.  

@Erik said:

Hi,

To inform you. Updated (and slower) version of the Violin Concerto, part1:

1. Added: more articulations as available in Session Strings Pro
2. Added ....
   

Hi Erik, hello all

I have a high regard for your job, Erik. You try to get out the best of the libraries - as William mentioned as well.

And you did this with a very big effort. Thanks a lot for publishing the results of your work.

Going a step further we get the following facts with the comparison of samples:

(in any order)

1. The way how samples are mixed (either themselfs or by the mix) is finally very important for the result as well. I don't know the solution for a fair comparison concerning this matter.
2. The interpretation of the music is important. Maybe a solution could be here to come as close as possible to a real performance.
3. Such Library-Comparisons are also comparisons of the particular users. I don't know how to exclude this point.
4. It seems that it is even more difficult to get a harmonious mix with samples of different sellers - especially when the samples come with different wet-components.
5. Even if VSL offers "older" samples they seem still to be in the race -->>> the "good old string libraries" of VSL 😉.
6. In fact, such a test (with optimized conditions) could really separate libraries
7. To be fair one should set different tasks for compared libraries: a piece of Jazz, Rock, Classic at a time for example.
8. there are certainly more points...

All the best

Beat

Hi Beat, William and others.

Thank you for your kind words. Maybe I will do also a VSL version myself later within the same plugin context as the Session Pro version!

Concerning the list of Beat: I think you are quite right about alle these issues. In a way it is undoable to compare libraries for other users, because we all have our own way of handling them in a specific musical surrounding. Too many parameters are involved. But.....regard this contribution moreover as the result of just interest in what I use nowadays as libraries. I have learned that sometimes things turn out to be sursprisingly good (as the VSL Chamber in the South-by-South West version in another thread). The reverse does exist also: starting a mock-up with samples A or B doesn't always fit my musical idea of the sound of a piece, so I have to change things in this case: library, samples C, verb etc..

After all the main profit is getting to know a piece so well after diving into the score (like with the Britten and also this time with the Bach Concerto: it is just such good music!). What a wealth!

Best,

Erik