DG,

1 - Of course I have. I have given several attempts and made several templtes to try to get it to work simply how it should have in the first place. I'm nearly ready to buy hauptwerk. I like VSL, I like the team behind it. However, this really is a scar on the product line and should be addressed.

2 - Great, is there a way to have VI Pro do it for me automatically? Other libraries can [;)] I don't want a jimmy rig on this. I'm requesting a library change or if a jimmy rig is opted for, then it should be as simple as it is with other libraries. You check a box and it happens.

3 - Crec patches don't apply to legato. My request isn't unfounded given the nature of VSL making their library dynamically flat. I'm not opposed to that, I'm simply asking for a humanize feature. This could apply to staccato velocities as well. I'm talking about creating more authentic performances with ease. If you don't like the suggestion, don't comment on it.

Please understand, I don't mean offense and I know you didn't. I simply feel that if you aren't contributing to something that will actually help me, then you are hurting this feedback, which users have discussed before about VSL. I feel strongly about these features and didn't jump on here in a rush. I have spent time thinking about them and in lieu of working on improving my systematic workflow, these are some of the most important failures within my setup. Very honestly, if these can't be addressed and if another library will... that other library will become my 'go-to' template. VSL, with only one exception, is hands-down the best library IMO. But I'm less interested in a flexible library. That has non-obligatory uses. The most obligatory function of a library is that it sounds natural when it is played. VSL is very capable of that, but only after detailed user input that is often not necessary. VSL has also lead the industry in addressing this, to create the most powerful, flexible, yet easier to use library. I'm a fan. But these are just as essential, if not more, than humanizing the pitch and timing.

I'm perfectly fine if people can't see reason on this. [:P] But in all seriousness, I'm perfectly fine finding other options. With how much competition is growing in the sampling world, my hope is that VSL will continue innovating core sollutions for their library, not reject ideas because they feel that user-created jimmy rigs are viable solutions. They might solve VSL's problem getting me off their back. They don't solve my issues.

-Sean

For the record, I bought another string library because...

1) They had a violin II and after using a fake EQ'd Violin II for a year and not being happy with it. (Notice how I used it first)

2) I also bought the library as it wasn't 'dynamically flat'. I love VSL's flexibility, but I needed a 'go-to' option to save time and hassle. I use VSL when it suits, but my core string library now isn't VSL. My core brass and winds are. I also use VSL's solo strings. I would prefer using the string libraries I've paid for, but the problems above, and these here, are why I don't. That is almost the entirety of my reasoning.

Also... After using VSL's Organ, for about a year now, I'm looking at Hauptwerk.

This pattern isn't good for VSL. Don't get me wrong. I LOVE VSL. I'll always use what I consider to be in many ways an unmatched library. I also like the people behind it (which influences my support heavily). I'm simply remarking on areas for improvement. If it CAN be improved, it OUGHT to be. These are among a very small list of flaws in what I consider a nearly perfect library. Unfortunately, they have a huge impact on the core 'playback quality' the library has before you start fine tuning. It should sound good going in, then you fine tune. You shouldn't have to fine tune everything in order to get a base-line performance. The entire reason the Humanize feature exists is for this same reason. So why not simply add one more option to it?

-Sean

1. Why would you take offense if you didn't already say that you had tried the VSL Organ? How was I supposed to know that?
2. Fair enough.
3. If you post on a user's forum, you have to expect opinions that don't coincide with your own. I have yet to hear anything from another library concerning these dynamic patches that sounds any good, but I'm not saying that you shouldn't need them, I just didn't understand what you wanted.

DG

@iscorefilm said:

[...] I have wasted my money on VSL's organ. VSL is capable of correcting that. [...]

-Sean

Hi Sean, sorry if I come across as a bit dense now - but what was the problem with Vienna Konzerthaus Organ again ... ? [*-)] 

@iscorefilm said:

Organ VST

Seriously, it's needed. I know it's effort and not financially rewarding. But everything about VSL is... right. This isn't.

That is one of the oddest things I've yet heard here.   The Konzerthaus Organ is perhaps the best single instrument in the library - it is perfect.  But you totally reject it because it doesn't have an interface that fakes an organ console like Hauptwerk?   It it just as fast to use, in fact probably faster for someone who is not a pipe organ player. Are you? Since one uses a normal VI setup to switch between registrations and/or stops, all of which are sampled EVERY SINGLE PIPE, it is totally straight forward to use.  You simply cannot do a better job of sampling than what was done with this organ, which is one of the great organs of Europe.  And yet that is a blemish?  That is simply ridiculous. 

Also, strings are "dynamically flat."  What on earth does that mean?  In actual musical terms?  They are recorded with an immense number of dynamic variations and layers, yet they are "dynamically flat."  Right.  By the way - if you have another string library as your core strings, your music will not sound as good as VSL.  If you disagree, post it here and it will be interesting to A/B with any of the demos. 

The reason you get a response like this is that this thread is mis-labeled - it is not a feature request, but rather it is a critique that is wrong in its basic assumptions.

The reason I get an attitude response is because I don't agree with you and this community is full of attitude. I know as I've dished it out plenty of times. I love VSL this, I love VSL that. That doesn't make the library perfect or as realistic as real players. I'm horribly sorry that I'm trying to request ways to improve performance automatically. I didn't realize that would be shunned to heavily. I tried to be light hearted and friendly. I would suggest that we call calm down and talk about this productively, but I'm fairly sure you guys have made up your mind.

Dietz,

The Organ samples sound beautiful. I am not asking for an organ console, but for the ability to set stops on the fly like you can while playing an organ. I'm sorry if I wasn't clear and I'm sorry if I came off as offensive to your hard work. I simply feel like I spent money on something I can't use the way I would expect. I don't think you did crappy work. I just feel like a software solution to this should have matched the level of quality I expect from VSL.

For the record (please don't argue with me on this, I am simply clarifying)... by dymanically flat, I simply meant that VSL recorded patches to be controlled as opposed to having existing dynamic changes in the playback. I do not own the entire VSL library and I'm sure there are plenty of crecendos, etc. But I want legatos, staccato variations, and a general humanized playback. That is something I have seen other companies addressing in (like Finale, and even some libraries via their articulations... not just some articulations, but all of them).

-Sean

I didn't give you an "attitude response."   I am telling you what I know about using VSL.   The assumptions in your post are exactly opposite of what is actually in the VSL library.

You ask - how can I change organ stops on the fly -  keyswitches.  In fact, unless you are a pipe organ player you will find that faster than using an actual pipe organ registers reproduced on screen.  Also, the Konzerthaus organ already has commonly used registers  set up for instant access. Those were sampled separately from the individual pipes.  However, if you want unique registrations, you can do absolutely anything you could do with the actual organ, sitting at the console, by using the same MIDI/VI/VE setup you would use for any other instrument, stacking stops, switching instantly, etc.  So that as well as the samples is why since this is such a great recording of a great organ and I react against somebody off the internet stating - it is a "blemish."  That is a complete distortion. 

Also, what you you say about dynamic samples is weird, since VSL more than any other library recorded massive numbers of actually changing dynamic samples for all the strings.    So it is, in fact, the most dynamically realistic of all libraries yet recorded.  And yet you call it "dynamically flat." That is absurd.   Not an attitude, just an inevitable observation. 

William,

You're right. Your opinions are inevitably right and mine are wrong. You win.

I've clearly contributed nothing useful to the VSL forum and you have by pointing out how much I clearly don't know what I am talking about.

-Sean

 Hi Sean,

don't be too angry at William. He's known on these pages to be quite passionate (... ok: VERY passionate) about stuff he likes, and VSL libraries just happen to be amongst these items. ;-)

At least I understand your problem regarding Vienna Konzerthaus Organ better now. It seems as you missed the obvious solution for instantaneous organ registrations: Simply use Vienna Ensemble (Pro or non-Pro) as your "register panel"!

Instantiate as many instances of Vienna Instruments, each loaded with _one_ of the organ stops of your choice. Assign easy-to-read names to the individual channels. Make sure that all instances receive MIDI on the same (!) MIDI-channel and -Port. (For the separation of two or more manuals and/or pedals just use different MIDI-channels.) - Mute all Ensemble channels.

Now un-mute any stop you want to hear as part of your registration. You can save them as Selection Group, if you want to. (To save voices, you could even switch off any VE-Channels you don't need in the Channels List on the left).

... that's it, in a nutshell! Takes longer to describe than to set up. ;-) Of course, many individual refinements are possible, too. The only "downside" might be that you don't get a pseudo-realistic GUI with wooden panels and ivory buttons. ;-D

HTH,

William,

First, I have realized how unfair I've been on a couple points. Be warned- not much infurates me more than when someone refuses to accept that I have already worked something out and it hasn't worked for me. So please understand that the reason why I have been 'closed' on this, is because I have already been open in my attempts to resolve this leading up to this point. You have your experiences and I have mine and we won't see eye to eye. Where you clearly see VSL differently than I do, I do not believe we will resolve anything. I'm sure you are very capable. I assure you I am not a noob. I accept our difference, resolvable or not, and wish you well.

Dietz,

I found a different sollution. VE would not work for me the way you described. It's a smart workaround, but not useful for me. Fyi, I tried that exact setup last year without any progress.

My workflow: I use VST expression to make my adjustments. That is part of a greater workflow that cannot change. I will spare the details to avoid another pointless and lengthy discussion about considerations I have already made. Suffice it to say... I need to edit one stave, one track, but with multiple sounds available on that track. Multiple midi channels with muting simply won't work for VST Expression to give me an easily switchable stops setup.

The Solution: However, I now have found that by having every track on the same midi channel and using 2 keyswitches to activate/deactivate the stop... I have the single track for each manual which is easily editable. This certainly took my longer to make then it did to write up this comment... but it works with my setup. That's all I care about.

Thank you for dealing with my frustrations respectfully,

Sean

@iscorefilm said:

[...]

That's not what I suggested (quite contrary, actually), but as long as you've found a workable solution, it's fine!

Kind regards,