@fahl5 said:

Sorry guys, this thread seems to me either to early or to late.

...

HoweverI'll let you know what I think about my satisfaction with this library not before I have done at least a couple of projects with it.

I agree fahl5, and I wrote a "RECOMMENDATION" post about it... LOL 😊

The VI Pro has always been the most flexible and powerful player on the market for years: Play is totally unflexible, and Kontakt is complex and intricate being a platform for development... both of them often not 100% reliable... so VSL in my opinion did it again, and Synchron Player is the most easy to arrange and the more flexible patch builder and sample player I've ever seen. It's my opinion, but I think it's almost undisputable after you spend just few minutes reading instructions watching videos and more important, experimenting with it.

But...

- sounds artifacts and naive solutions are still evident and objective: I can't blame customers being disappointed, as I was.

- demos were already a bit weak... I had the hope they were made under pressure with unfinished product just to accellerate pre-sales and start pre-funding the expensive project. Now I realize some limits in the sound are unfortunately enbedded in the way the samples are layered. Extreme use of cross-fades and sample overlappings, even if made with advanced sound engineering, is a step back, is not a quantum leap. The probelm is even bigger due to the fact samples are wet, and everybody knows that it adds complexity for sound engineering and developers, to properly connect and blend them. This is again an almost undisputable criticism we can't blame customers for. The sound of cross fading and overlapping samples too often is going close to a "big-sample-synth-keyboard" of the 90's or early 2000 lybraries, and it's not the sound you expect from VSL.

- VI Pro was more transparent and technical... I'm missing in the EDIT window the level of details you had in the VI Pro advanced mode... looking how many samples play, how and when, how many and what variations, how a patch is created and finally manipulating every little ingredient to the extreme detail. Now it's obvious Synchron Player has another target, and aim for semplicity and "non-disclosure" of tricks... (but let me be a bit malicious, even because some tricks are not very nice to be disclosed, IMVHO).

Then due to the fact some "pure" samples in the lybrary are fantastic (not surprising, because great musicians and great technicians produced them), and the player is a fantastic concept, I still hope in the future. But now I have to join the number of disappointed people, with the already objective arguments we had above.

P.S. For the peace of people "Wiliam-like" I posted already music made with Synchron and compared with things I achieved with Chamber, Orchestral and Dimension strings. Working on projects in DAW and in Notation, the most valuable new feature of Synchron Strings is consistency and dynamic balance. It really saves your time and sounds in good balance immediately, so you can spend time refining expression and phrasing instead of fixing dynamic inconsistencies across sections and articulations... I hope going ahead I will confirm this great feeling I had working with Synchron. My 2 (and one-half...) cents.

@Another User said:

It is not an oustanding product

From a technical point of view it definitly is above everything else available. Just to pretend the opposite, does not show very much insight in the current market of orchestral samplelibraries.

I am still not very convinced yet from rantings like that.

@Another User said:

It is not an oustanding product

From a technical point of view it definitly is above everything else available. Just to pretend the opposite, does not show very much insight in the current market of orchestral samplelibraries.

I am still not very convinced yet from rantings like that.

The single most important thing for a sample library is how it sounds. For a string library like this, you want it to sound like real strings are performing (or as close to that as possible).

It doesnt matter how "technically advanced" it is if it cant get the basics correct, or if all the layers and round robins don't deliver an improved performance.

@Eptesicus said:

The single most important thing for a sample library is how it sounds. For a string library like this, you want it to sound like real strings are performing (or as close to that as possible).

It doesnt matter how "technically advanced" it is if it cant get the basics correct, or if all the layers and round robins don't deliver an improved performance.

The most important thing with technic is that you must learn to use it. Before trying that, you simply dont know what you are talking about.

 

@Eptesicus said:

The single most important thing for a sample library is how it sounds. For a string library like this, you want it to sound like real strings are performing (or as close to that as possible).

It doesnt matter how "technically advanced" it is if it cant get the basics correct, or if all the layers and round robins don't deliver an improved performance.

The most important thing with technic is that you must learn to use it. Before trying that, you simply dont know what you are talking about.

 

I have tried it. I cannot get this to deliver as convincing or realistic performance as other string libraries, and seemingly no one else can.

Why do you think so many people who own the library are disappointed/complaining if the library doesn’t have some fundamental flaws?

@Eptesicus said:

The single most important thing for a sample library is how it sounds. For a string library like this, you want it to sound like real strings are performing (or as close to that as possible).

It doesnt matter how "technically advanced" it is if it cant get the basics correct, or if all the layers and round robins don't deliver an improved performance.

The most important thing with technic is that you must learn to use it. Before trying that, you simply dont know what you are talking about.

 

Do you think legto-slur is normal? The most important thing of string music is legtoslur. Don't run away from reality.

@yilalatavsl said:

Do you think legto-slur is normal? The most important thing of string music is legtoslur. Don't run away from reality.

One important thing for me is terminology. Legato slur is nothing new, it's the same patch we all know from the previous libraries and must not be mixed up with slurred legato. The real slurred legato (which you are referring to) for me is fingered legato, which is actually the normal legato. Legato slur is just a bit more pronounced with some portamento, more blurred. I think this terminology is and ever was misleading. Maybe I'm wrong.

@Eptesicus said:

Why do you think so many people who own the library are disappointed/complaining if the library doesn’t have some fundamental flaws?

I just think as I already pointed out several times, that just a couple hours after finishing the last download seem to me much to early to pretend, to know all about the right setup, settings, handling, and usage of every possihble option to be able to judge it's limits. I simply do not want to judge anything before trying hard, to get what I want in real project contexts.

I do have the imnpression that the most important difference between constructive critic and complains and ranting is the ability to become concrete in every necessary detail. And yes I believe you must have tried and explored all settings and reasonable combinations in realproject context, to be ready for conrete and constructive improvement suggestions.

I fear often more or less ranting complains are based on a often nearly irrational idealistic demand of what a product should be.

To be realistic one should better start, from what a product can be. If you know any better product - go for it no problem. If you have any concrete suggestions for improvements let us know but just complaining "buhuhu it is not ideal enough for me" tires me really.

As I said I am currently still a good part away from concerns about how useful which single function is, since I still prepare some ambitious projects to explore it.. And of course I will give my feedback about what my impression is to work with. But somehow I simply have the impression, that complaining a product just a few moments after finishing the download seem to be in grerat danger to be simply superficial.

@Eptesicus said:

Why do you think so many people who own the library are disappointed/complaining if the library doesn’t have some fundamental flaws?

To be realistic one should better start, from what a product can be. If you know any better product - go for it no problem. If you have any concrete suggestions for improvements let us know but just complaining "buhuhu it is not ideal enough for me" tires me really.

 

But that isnt what people are doing. There is a lot of detailed criticism in this thread that i agree with (so no point in just writing it again).

The legato needs to be totally redone and the articulations like sfz need to be properly done as well.

From what I can hear, the legato doesnt work because they seemingly can't get the recorded transition to sit properly inbetween the two related sustains. The attacks on the sustains are too much, especially for the non - soft ones so the normal legato, especially, just doesnt sound like legato at all. The transition is almost inaudible, and then you get this big attack at the start of the next note. That is why it doesnt sound realistic or musical.

Many libraries record the transitions going into a seperate/new sustain, which often sounds more natural and connected. Or, if they do it Syncrhon's way, they do a much better job of editing/crossfading the sustains and transitions.

If VSL don't have the expertise to execute the legato in the way they have done with Syncrhon, then they shouldnt have tried to do it that way.

@fahl: Acting as if a) people didn't havy any knowledge and experience to base their impresisons on and b) this was the only product of its kind on the market period, is pretty silly. You do not have to "try harder" to confirm that stuff that isn't there isn't there. Like a portamento patch for example.

You also don't have to conduct gargantuan projects to be able to tell that for example the sfz articulation is fake and sounds plain bad, or that the legato is subpar. That's called having a pair of functioning ears and experience with working with sample libraries.

You also don't have to wait for miraculous insights to realize that the library eats up 3x of disk space compared to others while offering less in terms of actual tools to work with.

The whole argument is wrong. The library wasn't released yesterday. Most of us have had it on their drives for at least half a year. People, in fairness, however in fact DID wait instead of putting out premature verdicts - perhaps hoping that the bigger picture would reveal itself after the new player comes into the fold.

Most people here have voiced measured and honest feedback and criticism. These are valid concerns and not something that only needs time to come to grips with. The library size won't shrink if I spend enough time writing music with it. A real performance fortepiano won't appear in the folder if I spend enough time repeating the word.

Nobody said that no music can be made with the library, or that it didn't have any qualities to it at all. But to simply fall back to the same old insinuations that critical voices are merely dabblers and idiots is doing a disservice to all parties involved.

@Eptesicus said:

If VSL don't have the expertise to execute the legato in the way they have done with Syncrhon, then they shouldnt have tried to do it that way.

That's a bit harsh, but I agree. It's new to them, for sure, to make a wet library. And I really think they have to re-think their recording and editing procedures. Maybe the old ones aren't working for this kind of libraries.

@JimmyHellfire said:

@fahl: Acting as if a) people didn't havy any knowledge and experience to base their impresisons on and b) this was the only product of its kind on the market period, is pretty silly. You do not have to "try harder" to confirm that stuff that isn't there isn't there. Like a portamento patch for example.

You also don't have to conduct gargantuan projects to be able to tell that for example the sfz articulation is fake and sounds plain bad, or that the legato is subpar. That's called having a pair of functioning ears and experience with working with sample libraries.

You also don't have to wait for miraculous insights to realize that the library eats up 3x of disk space compared to others while offering less in terms of actual tools to work with.

The whole argument is wrong. The library wasn't released yesterday. Most of us have had it on their drives for at least half a year. People, in fairness, however in fact DID wait instead of putting out premature verdicts - perhaps hoping that the bigger picture would reveal itself after the new player comes into the fold.

Most people here have voiced measured and honest feedback and criticism. These are valid concerns and not something that only needs time to come to grips with. The library size won't shrink if I spend enough time writing music with it. A real performance fortepiano won't appear in the folder if I spend enough time repeating the word.

Nobody said that no music can be made with the library, or that it didn't have any qualities to it at all. But to simply fall back to the same old insinuations that critical voices are merely dabblers and idiots is doing a disservice to all parties involved.

Hi Jimmy I do no polarise as you obviously feel I do. so no need for further excitment.

What I am simply pointing out, that I would not judge the behavior of a complex and powerful new software before using it seriously. And I personally do prefer to do that more than a couple of hours after the first download.

Still what you pretend you can simply demonstrate for instance with examples comparing the behavior of Synchron-Strings compared to previous  VSL-Patches iof you really believe, that the Synchron-Strings with more Velocity-Layer behave dynamicly less convincing, ort the Legato has not the quality of previous VSL-Patches (If I remember well It was the VSL who introduced Legato in Orchestral Sampling so to believe thy do not have the expertise for sounds a bit strange to me.).

So let us hear with concrete audio-examples from really comparable situations, what you mean, everybody can judge himself. 

Wouldn't that be a more concrete and detailed and constructive way than just complaining in loud and provocating ranting manner?

(BTW.: to test Orchestral Samples with complete and original Orchestral compositions is not at all "gargantuan" but for Orchestral music pretty realistic and for real orchestralo music it is indeed quite common to be notably longer than 2-3 minutes, what gives room for a öarger variety of orchestral colors than any snippet-composition might present. imho at least this gives a good and representative occasion to explore the ability of a sample-libreary how far it is able to fullfill the demands of real orchestral music).

I think the player is nice, but lacking in some respects (humanization).

Honestly, with such limited articulations and techniques in the Synchron Strings, I wish I would have saved the money I spent on the pre-order and purchased Spitfire Symphonic Strings.  You get a complete set of beautifully recorded in-situ strings, multiple mic positions, with little lacking in terms of techniques and articulations (sordini, col legno, spiccato, sul tasto, sul pont, flautando, harmonics, brushed, digs, runs, falls, etc. etc.), don't have to wait forever for a player (runs on Kontakt) and there's a brilliant Universal Articulation Change Control system built in (I have one ruleset that controls ALL my Spitfire libraries, whether it's strings, winds, whatever).

The money I spent on Synchron would have got me more than halfway to purchasing a mature robust beautifully recorded in-situ library.

I frankly see the articulations and techniques available in Synchron as very limiting.  I will go to my Spitfire Chamber Strings instead every time for a more subtle nuanced sound.  

And I don't intend to pay hundreds more for expansions.

Disappointed.

Spitfire????????? OMG

Great Library if you do not intend to use it for real music.....

well known for its most discusserd "Legatos" and extraordinary "humanisation"😛

@Another User said:

Wouldn't that be a more concrete and detailed and constructive way than just complaining in loud and provocating ranting manner?

Don't be so ignorant. As I already said, people have voiced measured and justified criticism and you're dismissing it as loud, provocative ranting. That's why your objections can't be taken seriously. Anyways, this is already enough of the usual kindergarten on VSL forums for me. I gave my honest feedback and that's all that matters. Cheers!

@fahl5 said:

Spitfire????????? OMG

Great Library if you do not intend to use it for real music.....

well known for its most discusserd "Legatos" and extraordinary "humanisation"😛

Well, thanks for confirming my suspicions that this is a community of VSL snobs not worth paying much attention to.

@fahl5 said:

Spitfire????????? OMG Great Library if you do not intend to use it for real music..... well known for its [i]most discusserd[/i] "Legatos" and extraordinary "humanisation"

Well, thanks for confirming my suspicions that this is a community of VSL snobs not worth paying much attention to. Please don't lump everybody in with the individual whom you're addressing. Many of us appreciate the quality of VSL but are equally open to discovering comparable quality in other non-VSL libraries.

@fahl5 said:

Spitfire????????? OMG Great Library if you do not intend to use it for real music..... well known for its [i]most discusserd[/i] "Legatos" and extraordinary "humanisation"

Well, thanks for confirming my suspicions that this is a community of VSL snobs not worth paying much attention to. Please don't lump everybody in with the individual whom you're addressing. Many of us appreciate the quality of VSL but are equally open to discovering comparable quality in other non-VSL libraries.

Point appreciated Acclarion, but it's a general sense I've gotten over many years of posting here.  

I'm a big fan of VSL products as well, but I really am disapointed in the Synchron libraries.  What the offensive poster doesn't seem to realize is that there's a reason that VSL pursued the Synchron series, and it has to do I believe with competition from the likes of *gasp* Spitfire and others.  If VSL had such a great thing going, why did they change direction?  

I own both the Dimension Strings libraries, and I agree with other posts, I wish VSL had continued evolving them.  They're great if you want to dive a mile deep, but sometimes you want a mile wide.  😊

@Another User said:

Wouldn't that be a more concrete and detailed and constructive way than just complaining in loud and provocating ranting manner?

Don't be so ignorant. As I already said, people have voiced measured and justified criticism and you're dismissing it as loud, provocative ranting. That's why your objections can't be taken seriously. Anyways, this is already enough of the usual kindergarten on VSL forums for me. I gave my honest feedback and that's all that matters. Cheers!

I fear you did not make the difference between the samples available in VI Format and the Library in Synchron-Player Version, which is the only thing I am interested in. This no matter of ignorance, but a significant difference, since the Library was developed and intended for the Synchron-Player. And imho there definitly was scarcly time enough to professionally learn and explore the usage of this Synchron-Player-Library.