Hi Fatis,

It seems to me as if we talk about different aspects. There are Runs which are of course even in High tempi played in one bow. that is absolutly right. The Cube provided for that special recorded "Runs" (which wwere not that easy adjustable) and the Later VSL-Libraries Dimension as Synchron have "Fast-Legatos" for thatI havent tried it yet for Runs, but I expect, that those fast-Legatos does not differ that much. 

But my point means another musical aspect:

As soon fast notes become thematically important as it seem to me the case with most of the notes in the theme of Strauss Heldenleben I personally would suggest to emphazise the attack of the single note over the transition between a whole group. ( I thought that you already noticed that the overlapping of slower Legatotransitions can bring up some unrealistic effects, what I do consent) absolutly) 

My consequence was just to remind, that Legatotransitions are in fast tempi for the melodic continuity by far of not that importants as they are in lower tempi and a Melody with "Slur"-notation-signs does not sound as played without slur so soon  in a fast tempo as it does in slower tempi, while emphazising the Attack definitly raises "in my humble opinion"  the attention for the single note even and especially in fast tempi.

If you would decide different than this is of course your interpretation. at that point I thinkl the discussion would make musically more sense to be made with concrete examples. But this is for copyrighjt reasons not possible for me with Strauss so I am limited to give my general suggestions.

But however I did not at all intended in any way to offend you or someone else. And I hope that you didn't read anything like that in my reactions on Stephens experiments as Stephen has asked for with his thread.

So calm down think about what other say and decide what is good for you. thats all.

I found this video, with the principle cellist of the Cleveland Orchestra very helpful.

https://musaic.nws.edu/videos/strauss-ein-heldenleben

Issue: in recreating these fast runs, while very clearly articulated with the left hand (or bow change), when duplicated by 9 other cello players and 8-10 more violas, in unison, sounds more like a slur than a crisp staccato 16th note as indicated in the score.  (Or think about 30 violins, including the old guys in the back of the section, all landing on those 16ths perfectly... lol.)

In making an articulation choice, do you copy the written score exactly, or do you copy the real sonic output?

And if I may make an editorial comment: There is no competing string library that could even come close to recreating the Ein Heldenleben excerpt... VSL is the only one.

And if I may make an editorial comment: There is no competing string library that could even come close to recreating the Ein Heldenleben excerpt... VSL is the only one. - Steven Limbaugh

I really agree with that, and it is often not noticed.  Often it is assumed all sample libraries are about the same  but VSL is totally different because of its closeness to the purely musical aspects of actual orchestral performance.  It is the library that is actually based on what conductors and players of symphony orchestras know - because many of the people there are actually orchestral musicians  starting from Herb who is a professional symphonic cellist in the center of the musical universe - Vienna.  Though I've used all the libraries what keeps me using VSL as the main one is its authenticity and total dedication to actual musical performance of the symphony orchestra.  

@stephen limbaugh said:

I found this video, with the principle cellist of the Cleveland Orchestra very helpful.

https://musaic.nws.edu/videos/strauss-ein-heldenleben

Issue: in recreating these fast runs, while very clearly articulated with the left hand (or bow change), when duplicated by 9 other cello players and 8-10 more violas, in unison, sounds more like a slur than a crisp staccato 16th note as indicated in the score.  (Or think about 30 violins, including the old guys in the back of the section, all landing on those 16ths perfectly... lol.)

In making an articulation choice, do you copy the written score exactly, or do you copy the real sonic output?

And if I may make an editorial comment: There is no competing string library that could even come close to recreating the Ein Heldenleben excerpt... VSL is the only one.

Well, yes you are right (bow changes are for the staccato notes only, also in your video it's perfectly visible that all legatos are made in one bow, and the excellent technic of left hand is defining the melodic line): in the orchestral execution, even if each player is actually playing the perfect bow legato/staccato changes, the "ensamble" effect and concert hall ambience is creating a bit of blur (but it also depends on orchestras, the 2 videos are slightly different on this aspect):

orchestra video 1

orchestra video 2

My personal attempt when I make my renditions, is to get the sonic output of course, but starting from the real articulation the players are supposed to use for getting the result. That's why I disagree about considering normal practice using shorts instead of legato patches: it's getting a perfect definition, but missing the connection between notes, (that is typical of synth-keyboard player vs. orchestral performance). Often it's enough to play with accents using velocity (another good reason to avoid velocity-cross fade, and keep velocity for the accent and melodic definition).

I didn't create any criticism about VSL at all. To be honest I don't know if VSL is "the only one... etc. etc." but I don't care: I'm here becase we talk about VSL. Actually my comment was about Synchron vs. Dimension or Chamber. In Dimension and Chamber strings you have a better set of tools to create convincing runs and fast legatos, and mostly it's due to the samples being dry and the overlapping of samples less invasive. The more I practice with Synchron, and the more I think crossfading and modulating wet samples is very tricky, and I'm getting convinced it's about 80% of the whole problem. The rest being programming and different sample processing.

Hi Fatis, Finally, it seems to me as if you describe besically nearly the same reasonable attitude as I do:

- Legato as far the impression of the "run" is what is aimed to achiev,

- The more the each single note of a melodic line becomes important the more you like me would emphazise it with an Accent.

- No one demands to ignore the notation of the score from the start, we all consent that one should start (!) with considering what a score originally asks for as playing technic.

The in my eyes slightly different opinions occur only at those details:

- I do not see that problem with X-Fade when it comes to ensemble patches since their possible Phaseshiftingeffects are quite natural and characteristic for an ensemblesound. But that is obviously a matter of taste for which aspect you do spend the greatest sensibility.

- As far as I could test it now there is absolutly no problem to du runs with the Synchron-Strings fast legato as it was before with Dimension strings to do it  with the performance-trill-patch which was basically kind of a fast legato.

- I fear it could be a bit misleading to think, what a score calls staccato, is "always" excatly the same what the Tone-Engineers who produced a sample-library call a Staccato-patch. - No, of course it is not, in my humble opinion each articulation hint of any score is always related to the musical context in which it occurs. No one would stricly stop in an adagio at each ending slur the melodic continuity, since the phrasing which is indicated here demands a completly different dynamic and agogical realisation as it would be in a faster more dancing tempo. Just consider some staccati in slow movements, if you realy would use a staccato patch for that and not at least a detache or even a dynamic swell on one note you will end up often enough with completly musical nonsens. Thats why I just remind, to consider the musical context. Using short patches in a fast melody does not necessarily mean that you realy achieve always a "crisp" seperated sequence of single notes, but often enough the higher the tempo is and depenmdent to what kind of short-patch you use something, what might be in respect of the clearness of each single tone more appropriate to what you are looking for when realising the score in its own musical reasonable context.

To automatically associate the patch, which is called identically with how the notation sign is called a composer use is what the playback-automatism of notationsoftware do. If this would not "automatically" be in danger to sound "synthy"but really lead always to the one and only most convincing musical realisation, things would be much simpler: Than Hurray, lets automate music!. But I fear in real music things are not that simple but as individual as dependent from each single musical context. No composer in historty ever composed for the "patches" we now use, but more or less "indicated" with the help of the notation signs just what their musical Idea was about. The inflexible association one playingtechnic to one patch does already ignores the always large possible variety how different playing terchnics could be executed. In so far there is no other way than trying to understand the music first before chosing which patch would be the most convenient for a certain passage.

@fahl5 said:

- I fear it could be a bit misleading to think...

Why do you fear? I don't think there is a need of so long debate on so obvious topic. It's crystal clear to anybody even with a basic musical education and poor understanding of sample sequencing.

Actually most of us here are graduated composers, experienced performers, and experienced producers.

Anyway about cross fading: as objective fact what you listen to is 14 violins then 28 violins then 14 violins again, and it's sometime pretty evident in the timbrical fluctuations, but even worse, you get the reverb tails mixing and building up, or being subtracted due to wet samples. That finally makes the sound very digital. But yes,  you are right, to like it or dislike it, it's a pretty personal matter of taste and sensibility.

@fatis12_24918 said:

Why do you fear?

Members who start stating something others said a<s "not true" before even tried to understand what exactly was meant, and later state just the same as their own insight. Not that impressive for someone "well educated" since education starts with being ready, willing and able to understand first. ...just my answer on your question.

@fahl5 said:

Members who start stating something others said a<s "not true" before even tried to understand what exactly was meant, and later state just the same as their own insight. Not that impressive for someone "well educated" since education starts with being ready, willing and able to understand first. ...just my answer on your question.

LOL 😂 clear from the first moment we have pretty different understanding of everything. Still I can’t resist to find hilarious you starting teaching things you don’t know, to people you don’t know.... so you’re start teaching composition to composers, conducting to conductors and production to producers. Why you don’t open a school for beginners? So finally you may feel good... just a little suggestion for free 😉

Lots and lots to think about here.  This has all been very insightful and productive.  Thanks guys.

I hadn't thought long and hard enough about reverb tails and how those behave (i.e., my primary focus was on the beginnings of notes, not the ends of notes). 

“... starting from the real articulation the players are supposed to use for getting the result. That's why I disagree about considering normal practice using shorts instead of legato patches: it's getting a perfect definition, but missing the connection between notes, (that is typical of synth-keyboard player vs. orchestral performance). Often it's enough to play with accents using velocity (another good reason to avoid velocity-cross fade, and keep velocity for the accent and melodic definition). I didn't create any criticism about VSL at all. To be honest I don't know if VSL is "the only one... etc. etc." but I don't care: I'm here becase we talk about VSL. Actually my comment was about Synchron vs. Dimension or Chamber. In Dimension and Chamber strings you have a better set of tools to create convincing runs and fast legatos,..” fatis Really agree with that. That’s why the fast legato articulations are so good in that case. Sometimes when unable to get a good rendition withthe assumed “proper” articulation I have thought to myself “what might a conductor do when this is happening with his players?” In certain cases a section might actually substitute detache for a legato to clarify the line. So that sort of “faking” it can have a justification but the great thing about VSL of course is not having to fake things (usually). On the whole subject of legato the most realistic of all sample libraries is Dimension Strings. When you play single line and have 8 violins performing it with all different humanize settings it is so much like a live section it is uncanny, and why? Because the individual are ACTUALLY playing different timings on the transitions - no faking it.