You sound like you are trying not to hurt my feelings or something - well, thanks, first of all :). Second - I understand your need, as a very respectable and long active VSL user to see the justice in DS hype. Now - I own both Chamber and Solo, I love them. I use Hollywood Strings, EWQLSO and love them - so no case of "Oh!- I love it, cause I paid a fortune to get it, and it will be my main thing from now own".
I am sorry, but I fail to see the "Ferrari" of DS, being the exotic abilities to play differently within an ensemble (fail to see that need altogether, if no divisi lines concerned.) I do love the luxury within DS to shape pretty much any ensemble you want, make them blend well, sound consistent and cohesive, be positioned differently and all, and frankly I cannot justify (for myself) the added workflow of actually playing in 25 takes - I know it can be done for great results, but I don`t see the special need. Workflow is also important for me.
Not to forget, that DS is much more recent in terms of detail - it sports 4 velocities across most of it articulations - and the legato ones really gain from that, if you are used to the original 2.
Anyway, I liked your extract, but it is very specific setting, and I can`t help but see it as an orange in apples discussion, with the solos being so upfront. If we would go Chamber head to head with the same amount of DS players - I am definite DS would win, for the reasons mentioned earlier - less interrupted "recorded ensemble" perception, and smoother behavior overall (and I do love Chamber in many ways) By the way, I really don`t like the DS demos from the product page. I bought it relying on my understanding of the great tech and potential - and it never failed me.
So - I guess I`ll just make a classical mock-up this weekend, to present it both with and without MIR, to show my point, that you don`t have to go exotics with DS to enjoy its qualities.
Vlad.