There are already a lot of controllable humanize functions in VI Pro.  But humanize functions are less effective than the randomness that comes into a performance during actual playing.  If you don't believe that, then A/B a keyed-in, manually CCed MIDI performance with a humanized notation file.   

What I really wonder about is the original subject of this thread.  If for instance, one took the exact same recording setup as Appassionata violins - same players, same positions on the recording stage, same microphones, etc. - and recorded 4 passes of 4-player desks (or however many the numbers would work out to be) for four divisi sections without changing anything, would it be possible to get a sound like the Appassionata full ensemble by combining them?  I know that it is impossible to do that with individual solo players.  But what about multi-player desks carefully recorded and combined without moving microphones or seating, etc?  It certainly works with the Dimension Brass, which sound exactly like solo vs. ensemble.  I have a feeling that this is what VSL is working on...  and if the automation of splitting can be done as well as it is done with the brass, you have the ultimate divisi strings.  However, as some people have complained about, there need to be an enormous amount of recordings done in order to duplicate enough articulations for full expressiveness.  If you have to choose between many different expressive possibilities without divisi, or divisi with only a few expressions, what will you do?  Decisions, decisions... 

@Another User said:

From my personal point of view I would speak more about an expansion than of an improvement.

I believe the question should be:

How could we come even closer to a real performance? If we ask this question we need...

1. some more articulations (min 4 layers)
2. most of the articulations should be available either with Vib or without Vib - if possible with "Sweet Vib" and  "Normal Vib" 
3. 4 levels with the legato samples (just as sus4Levl-perf - it allows nice X-fading sequences) 
4. more levels with the dynamic samples (3-4 for dim/cresc, 2(-3) for sfz, etc.)
5. Two different Violins
6. Two different Cellos
7. ...

Although I think Dimension would mean an improved blend and ANY new articulations and/or more bowing flexibility would be GREATLY welcomed... I think his list pretty well sums up the most important aspects of a future VSL string library. Perhaps, like their other products, and unlike their Dimension Brass... we will see a Dimension Strings expanded library. The more able to sound realistic, and more capable this library is... the more of a "I need this library more than any other" people will react to it. So in light of 'those other libraries', I doubt VSL is thinking much differently than us users are about what this library needs to be. And ultimately the point I wanted to make in that is that more divisi AND more expressive possibility are inseparable; most users seem to want both and will keep asking for it until both are had.

-Sean

Although I would welcome either additions to the library, using the 'horse behind the cart argument', I'd rather see a Violins II product first, since any Divisi derivatives would have to be developed separately for the two sections, otherwise the divisi between Vs.I and Vs.II would sound the very same and would need electronic tweaking (and they would still be the same, distorted). It's not like with the brass section which is not doubled in conventional orchestral writing.

Violin II would be nice. I'd welcome it and buy it. But Divisi offers more than just 'more voices'... but more voices for a less perfect playback. A dimension library would mean a better blend (depending) and so on. Violin II should have been out LONG before now if it was going to be done. Note, that the competition already has Violin II.... AND Divisi.... so at this point, while I'd welcome it. I'd also think that VSL would have made a seriously wrong move in doing so. They are already playing catchup here. I think users expect VSL to match and exceed the current expectations with anything new they produce. Vienna Imperial and Dimension Brass are absolutely that... So I just doubt they'd simply do a Violin II after release those two products.

-Sean

@iscorefilm said:

Violin II should have been out LONG before now if it was going to be done. Note, that the competition already has Violin II.... AND Divisi....

"Should" have been?  According to whom?  Zeus?  (Actually I would do it if he commanded.)

Violin II is a nice idea in solo strings (irrelevant in any ensemble string ensembles since you already have it unless you are too much of a moron to know it). If the solo  is slightly different in quality.  Such as a more relaxed vibrato and darker timbre. Then it would be worth sampling rather than merely pitch shifting and transposing (though as I know from having done it you DO get a difference in timbre by those means that is very effective).

However, the "competition" you mention is pathetic to be honest.  The depth of VSL recording is so far beyond any of the competition there is truly no comparison.  Even one library of VSL is beyond any of the others. And they have four!  What the other companies are all doing is trying to sucker people into buying their stuff with easy, quickie tricks.  Like it is "easier to do."  But all the "easier" things end up being lower quality in the long run. 

I do listen to these new libraries, and they are not comparable to VSL.  You need to realize one thing - VSL has been doing this with incredible focus for a decade now.  Every Johnny-come-lately looks cool - until you see their feebly limited articulations and hear their sound.   But many people are looking for instantaneous and crude sounds.  So they won't be interested in the difference. 

Nevertheless, the divisi strings would be an important addition to the VSL arsenal.  And new programming is making things easier to do all the time.  The technology behind dimension Brass is obviously similar to what is needed and can be used to develop a powerful divisi library.

@William said:

However, the "competition" you mention is pathetic to be honest.  The depth of VSL recording is so far beyond any of the competition there is truly no comparison.  Even one library of VSL is beyond any of the others. And they have four!  What the other companies are all doing is trying to sucker people into buying their stuff with easy, quickie tricks.

Look, I think Hollywood Strings mostly sounds like crap compared to VSL... imo anyway. I also agree that VSL is beyond everything else out there. Basic VSL is better than other libraries at their best, imo. But I'm not foolish enough to discount them as not being competition. I only make the comment in reference to what we'll likely be expecting from VSL. I simply doubt that it would be a Violin II, that's all.

-Sean

I'd die for a dimension strings library!!! 

If it would be available, it could finally be possible to control how "amateurish" the strings are playing, with modular internal tuning and timing on each player. It would be a huge step towards more realistic strings!

Another thing I have on my wishlist is to have the ability to xfade samples to silence with real recorded long release samples. Now I always have to combine velocity xfade with expression to make smooth releases. Anyone having any better tricks? I mean, the pfp-samples have fantastic real smooth attack and release, but no ability to play intervals. 

My third thing on my wishlist for strings is to have sul-samples for each string. For example for violins it would be sul-g, sul-d, sul-a and sul-e, with at least fast/slow legato and staccato samples.

I understand that a dimension strings library would be at least 10 times larger that the current strings library and eat tons of ram. But I know it would be worth it! 

//Felix

Seems to me like having divisi sections would require new full section samples, too. 

While I think LASS was keen in doing this, they did it from the ground up. Let's say I buy $5k in VSL string samples today...not buying a whole other $5k collection for divis sections. 

I think it would be a cooler "feature" given VSL's extensive sample collection to implement a faux autodivisi feature using maniuplations of volume and maybe timbre of existing content. Otherwise, everyone will have to be using the new sample sets to getthe divisi feature to work. And, if someone has thousands invested...divisi really is a subtlety, in the grand scheme.

I'm betting some of the tips in this thread could be rolled into the engine...take the lower of two notes played and use a sample or two DOWN and transpose UP (which would thin the sound naturally a bit) and low the volume of both by whatever percentage...even just make that an option, right? Whether you want the higher or lower voice "deemphasized".

Now, for the solo strings, which I own...they really COULD do a sample set of a second player/instrument of each. Same room, same mics. It isn't really even supposed to exactly match--that's the point, right? And that wouldn't be that expensive a session for them to have. It could be a "plus" add on for existing solo strings owners.

But, full divisi session means throwing away their current sample content. Not something I'd think is financially appealing to anyone. 

@popmann said:

implement a faux autodivisi feature using maniuplations of volume and maybe timbre of existing content. Otherwise, everyone will have to be using the new sample sets to getthe divisi feature to work.

First- I think recording and audio engineering principles make this impossible to make a reality.

Second- VSL wouldn't necessarily have to throw out the old in order to add divisi. I have thought of arrangements in which VSL could add a single dimension library that could both add a Chamber divisi and Violin II, or a Orchestral Divisi and Violin II (each with appropriate sized sections with both Chamber/Orchestral, while using the same exact patches, just organized differently per library). This would add Divisi and Violin II.

The only think I worry about is that other libraries are coming out. With what other libraries are doing, and VSL's history of pushing the limits, I think people expect VSL to not only have a Dimension string library... but one that has even more than what we do now. (Mute Spiccato... eh?) lol

-Sean

@popmann said:

But, full divisi session means throwing away their current sample content. Not something I'd think is financially appealing to anyone

No, that would not be the situation necessarily.  Divisi Strings could be an addendum.   It is actually quite similar to the brass.  If you have Dimension Brass, you have the auto divisi, the blending of 2, 3, 4 players with no worrying about phasing, the new solo player sounds, etc.  However,  you still like using the solo Cornet or the original Ensemble Trombones, or the Epic Horns, or the Piccolo Trumpet, or the Wagner Tubas, or the Cimbasso, or in fact, all the older VSL brass libraries because they are perfect for certain situations. 

I for example would sooner give up a limb rather than Epic Horns.

@William said:

I for example would sooner give up a limb rather than Epic Horns.

That is actually very sad and almost pathetic... and I agree with you! lol

-Sean