200,430 users have contributed to 43,198 threads and 259,083 posts.
In the past 24 hours, we have 3 new thread(s), 10 new post(s) and 80 new user(s).
Wow, thank you very much for this great comparison. Too bad there is no snippet for Appasionata Strings.
Judging from those snippets, in my opinion Dimension Strings are still the holy grail and pinnacle of all the VSL string libraries, yet combining them with Orchestral Strings really adds alot to them which is astounishing.
It is also quite interesting to see how well those old Orchestral Strings aged and still boldly stand against all the newer libraries, including SyS.
Nicola, this is a great midi rendition and an extremely useful comparison - thanks so much for sharing!
Dimension+Orchestral is my favorite version as well. However if I had to choose any single library it would actually be Orchestral, since they have this silky texture in the high strings (around 0.25), that is just amazing.
Dimension Strings FTW! I have SyS & Dimension. In my experience, DS + MIR is the king, easily. If only it had more velocity layers like SyS - it would be mind blowing!I would like to try DS with more layer, but just for curiosity, because I don't miss, say, 8 layers, the transition and the dynamic are already great. I suppose, but I have to say that I don't know anything about programming, that to record 8 velocity layer the string players have to play in a very "static" way to not change too much the dynamic of the note and the natural inner musicality could suffer a little bit because of this. Again, this idea probably is the most stupid idea of the last ten years and maybe I will understand it by myself, but I would like to know if it is completely wrong. I really love the Synchron strings' sound and surely I have to improve my ability with this new library, but for now it is the most difficult to use for me. Anyway until now only with VSL libraries I have the feeling that the pp is not a mf with lowered volume and for sure Synchron is not an ecception in this case 😉
I won't have Appassionata Strings, at least for now 😉 I agree with you, layering DS and Orch Strings the result is super!Wow, thank you very much for this great comparison. Too bad there is no snippet for Appasionata Strings.
Judging from those snippets, in my opinion Dimension Strings are still the holy grail and pinnacle of all the VSL string libraries, yet combining them with Orchestral Strings really adds alot to them which is astounishing.
It is also quite interesting to see how well those old Orchestral Strings aged and still boldly stand against all the newer libraries, including SyS.
For me DS is more focused while Orch. is more lush, different sound for different scope, the problem is that sometimes I don't know which one to choose, so I use...both 😊Nicola, this is a great midi rendition and an extremely useful comparison - thanks so much for sharing!
Dimension+Orchestral is my favorite version as well. However if I had to choose any single library it would actually be Orchestral, since they have this silky texture in the high strings (around 0.25), that is just amazing.
Hi William, I like the sound of SyS and it is different from the earler VSL strings libraries, it is more brilliant and, well, modern. What would you do to make its sound rounder? I am not an expert in mixing and so on, then I would appreciate every suggestion...The best one of this performance is Dimension Strings.
The Synchron have too much high frequency, a common problem in sampled strings.
I've been obsessed with this because I keep on going to live orchestral concerts and noticing how much darker the strings - especially violins - sound than sampled. I have been experimenting with doing various EQs. No settings that are "out of the box" are really like the live instruments. Recording engineers probably don't like this but I think the frequencies above 5000 hz should be almost gone, it is that extreme of a difference.
The question is why. It may have to do with the amplitude of those frequencies - they fall off more quickly with any distance or any absorption in the room. A recording studio and particular microphones negate this natural effect, leading to excessively bright violins.
Also even cellos can sound nasal. Another thing I have noticed between live and samples is cellos in an orchestral setting never sound "boomy" or deep, but almost always do with samples. There is a setting in MIR that somewhat accounts for this - "clean low end." But you can go even farther and add more EQ in the low range.
Hi William, Thanks for the answer, interesting point of you. I think that there are some differences between a live concert and a recording session, but I will try your suggestions 😉I've been obsessed with this because I keep on going to live orchestral concerts and noticing how much darker the strings - especially violins - sound than sampled. I have been experimenting with doing various EQs. No settings that are "out of the box" are really like the live instruments. Recording engineers probably don't like this but I think the frequencies above 5000 hz should be almost gone, it is that extreme of a difference.
The question is why. It may have to do with the amplitude of those frequencies - they fall off more quickly with any distance or any absorption in the room. A recording studio and particular microphones negate this natural effect, leading to excessively bright violins.
Also even cellos can sound nasal. Another thing I have noticed between live and samples is cellos in an orchestral setting never sound "boomy" or deep, but almost always do with samples. There is a setting in MIR that somewhat accounts for this - "clean low end." But you can go even farther and add more EQ in the low range.
Hi all,
This was an experimental piece for string orchestra, created exclusively with the Vienna Symphonic Library strings. In this version, I used Synchron Strings exclusively, with no additional reverb, except for a bit of "Miracle".
Metamorphosis - Synchron Version
In this version, I layered orchestral, chamber, and solo strings, and placed them in Mir's Teldex Studio.
Metamorphosis - Orchestral/Chamber/Solo Strings Version
My thoughts:
-I began this version by copying the midi data for the previous orchestral/chamber/solo strings version. In all, it took about 4 hours of tweaking to complete the Synchron version.
-I like the sharp attacks of the Synchron strings (it's nice to be able to have that little "marcato" at the start of a legato phrase)
-The shorts are clean, crisp, decisive
-Increased velocity layers allows for less precise tweaking of the expression cc data
-The workflow doesn't feel any more efficient using Synchron with the current Vienna Instruments player. Hoping that the soon-to-be-released Synchron player is more intuitive and improves workflow.
-The piece is a little "punchy/bombastic" in terms of the overall force of the sound. I was definitely trying to create a heavy handed performance with decisive articulations so that I could compare the two versions.
Dave
p.s. This is a duplicate of the post in the compositions thread, as I know many people might be interested in Synchron tests but don't visit that sub-forum.
Syncron is the clear winner for me. I hear more detail, and the room is more convincing. Also I get a clearer visual image of the string sections; maybe that comes from using one library? Great writing - and thanks for sharing!
Steve
Thank you very much for adding Appassionata Strings. ;-)You welcome 😊 Which one do you prefer? I really can't decide, I like all the different sounds, now I am working also with Dim Strings Sordinos, another world obviously and another great one!
Personally I prefer the Orchestral+Dimension Mix. Lush broad sound with a lot of depth. Dimension and Appassionata on their own sound great too. Appassionata sounds really lush and powerful. The weakest, in my opinion, is in fact Synchron.
