@DG said:

OR's Agile legato sound like a cheap synth,

I think same after first listen to demos. And after about half year from release this library is unusable due to bad programming.

With VSL, the expansion pack is when you purchase the Extended, also labeled L2, edition.

@Rolf_Music said:

The problem to alot of the issues regarding "dynamics" and "conflicts with crossfading" would be solved if we had the option to "automate the in built eq on a matrix level" and if we had a "high pass filter". Including the option to change eq and filters on a patch level. I also think it would be great to introduce a melodyne similar feature which enhances vibrato without changing the patches speed. As a result we would have a VI Pro which is alot more powerful than it is now.

I actually have a few suggestions with screenshots which I will post later in a different topic.

IE: for a solo instrument I do not velocity xfade, I think there is zero point to it. For a section, reinforcements and cancellations of phase are what happens. So where it occurs in velo xfade it's somewhat related to reality.

I don't think VSL can't be surpassed but I don't think OT is where this is going to happen. In terms of winds, Sample Modeling is the next evolutionary step. I'm not a great strings maven, but I think modeling of instrument behaviors applies, but the sound of strings is a different problem than brass or silver.

And that you're reading the marketing drivel by 8Dio quite uncritically; you see them go on about how they've solved the crossfading issue (no), and then this 'vibrato' purely through these devices of pitch/LFO as in synthesizers is the way to go. It's not exactly revolutionary.

If I can't be persuaded by demos...

I know nothing from Orchestral Tools strings via experience. However I have Berlin Woodwinds. They sound good I think. But it is basically articulations loaded individually in .nkis and there are multis to give you keyswitching. And there is layering of that. Big fuggen deal.

And it's buggy, it won't even load here. I got Orange Tree Samples Mind Control to give me an instance with more than one articulation. I'm pretty skeptical of VSL needing to stay competitive with this vendor. The "Articulations Performer" multi is following VSL from a decade ago with Giga Performance Tool in a sort of half-assed implementation. And they have abandoned it in the strings (buggy?), so we have the argument now that loading single .nkis is superior because you want to do a lot of work with crossfading anyway, individually. Sure, let's go back to that and pretend VI Pro didn't happen. Get real.

Hello everybody, 

Of course we appreciate your personal opinion in this forum, but let´s try to keep insulting phrases, both on a personal level and about software products, out of this discussion. 

Everybody in this business is doing their best to follow what they feel is right, and the diversity makes the scene as interesting as it is.

Thanks, 

Paul

VSL is the best without doubt. After purchasing some of their collections I started asking myself: "Why didnt I purchase from them before? Lost alot of money through Kontakt libraries".

Anyways, just thought I would share what I was thinking :D

I still think that it would be kind of nice to see specialized packages for each articulation, specifically for strings as they are the most complex :D

I just wanted to add something here about the relationship between the complex issues of realism and sustained notes. It is on sustained notes that one is more likely to become aware of the vibrato in the sample repeating - which sounds unrealistic. Awhile ago I questioned whether it would be possible for VSL to create a vibrato equivalent of the global humanize function in VPro. The thread is here:

http://community.vsl.co.at/forums/p/36559/224706.aspx#224706

There wasn't much response to this and no word from anyone at VSL as to what they thought of it.

To recap, my suggestion was to start with a non-vibrato sample. The software could be triggered by any note long enough for the vibrato to be audible (starting at a couple of seconds?). The software would apply random types of vibrato to the single sample. The humanize software already includes five types of vibrato. This would mean avoiding the need to do more recording and create more samples, and the software would be added to VPro.

This isn't meant to cure all the issues to do with achieving realism but I think it would make a big difference - especially on a solo violin line.

I agree that the main problem are sustained notes on solo instruments with vibrato, especially strings. I am trying and experimenting around in order to get different results but I think Im getting very very close. Just need to work more on the realism.

Here one test where you see 2 versions of a Violin and Cello. One is the Raw Patch and the other always the modified version. Deliberately raised the bow noise but check how the vibrato is changing the entire time. I did alot of changes in the tone. Used patch combos etc.

http://vocaroo.com/i/s0fOZrkdSjvh

@Oceanview said:

The software would apply random types of vibrato to the single sample. The humanize software already includes five types of vibrato. This would mean avoiding the need to do more recording and create more samples, and the software would be added to VPro.

 

The problem I've always had with any kind of randomization functionality built into software, whether it's legato/vibrato varieties or quantizing notes (like in the old days), is that the software always chooses to use the most awkward and/or inappropriate note, start/stop time, velocity, etc. then I have to go back and re-edit everything over again anyway.  The reason for these inconsistencies is really simple: Software will never have any common sense. 

@ Rolf Music,

I'm not trying to pick a fight or anything as you sound like a sincere person who is just trying to write better music, like the rest of us, but it could be that you are writing music that is outside the scope of any sample library.  The costs associated with producing these "expansion packs" could be substantial to VSL to say the least and personally I don't think I would be interested in them because they would just over complicate my workflow.  Speaking from a marketing point of view I'm not sure there is enough of a demand for this to justify the expense.     

I agree on both things. Randomizers are bad and you are right absolutely right about the expansion packs idea. I noticed that is true, especially from a marketing point of view. I have to admit, you are absolutely right. However,  I somehow noticed that you can create all articulations you want. Im not just refering to the slot x fade patch combinations but also a rather surgical approach with automation using an equalizer by targeting all relevant areas.

In the first test which I shared here I was experimenting with bow noise and very long sustains. Also the second cello version was rather harsh sounding because I wanted to emulate a very strong bowing. Strong bowing techniques usually expose alot of overtones. The realism in the ears of professionals however can be questionable but by analyzing the frequency of a reference piece (or a few notes) you can actually reproduce a nearly authentic "extreme bowing sound" by properly exposing the corresponding  overtones.

I also have another experiment where I tried to figure out ways to create a strong and fat vibrato. I used portamento for this but every patch gives different results. I could create romantic vibratos, vibrato to gradually less vibratos and viceversa... the options are endless. Again all surgical procedures. Not much reverb.

Here the second test:

http://vocaroo.com/i/s1Oz4ehuMYb3

Again this can greatly be improved and im experimenting around and around. This experiment does not use velocity for the volume / dynamic change, neither any filters but just by automating a few EQ gain parameters yet keeping all frequencies 99.9% in phase.