183,286 users have contributed to 42,289 threads and 255,036 posts.
In the past 24 hours, we have 4 new thread(s), 14 new post(s) and 58 new user(s).
About the problem with "baked-in reverb" pulsations ...
If you or someone else has Synchron Percussion, is this a problem there at all?
Bruno in his post mention Synchron percussions. But I'm sorry I don't own them, just Synchron Strings. (My personal post was about strings indeed, sorry for being unclear), I have no experience with Synchron percussions, so maybe Bruno can comment about your question.
I can't really answer your question because wIth Synchron Percussion I've used only the Close mic, adding MIR for reverb. That way it mixed nicely with my other VSL instruments, and I had no problems with the baked-in reverb pulsating.
About the problem with "baked-in reverb" pulsations ...
If you or someone else has Synchron Percussion, is this a problem there at all?
Bruno in his post mention Synchron percussions. But I'm sorry I don't own them, just Synchron Strings. (My personal post was about strings indeed, sorry for being unclear), I have no experience with Synchron percussions, so maybe Bruno can comment about your question.
About the problem with "baked-in reverb" pulsations ....
If you or someone else has Synchron Percussion, is this a problem there at all?
Probably you know it better than me, but anyway I'm expecting Percussions being really less problematic using the wet samples, because a part for some dynamic repetitions (e.g. rolls) it's unlikely you use Expression on them. The available crescendos and diminuendos should totally cover the needs and keep the natural reverb almost always ringing. (that's the "think Synchron" phylosophy in my understanding).
Anyway nice to know that it's possible to succesfully mix them in MIR using close samples.
(Probably easier with Percussions, being an almost monophonic source, than a string section, which missing a bit of depth and dimension if you use the close mono mic instead of the stereo ambience image...)
I've never experienced Dimension Strings' bleed through as a problem at all. It makes the players sound more like a section. The only time it would be problematic is if you really wanted to use a player as a leading soloist, which is not recommended for so many reasons, the bleed through actually not being the most important of the reasons. So overall DS is one of my favorite libraries.
As for the demos above, they all sound very good, though I do agree that Synchron has a few choppy-sounding moments. I don't want to point the finger at your programming or at VSL's programming, but overall that's what I'm hearing. The shorts, however, are really some of the best out there!
I've never experienced Dimension Strings' bleed through as a problem at all. It makes the players sound more like a section. The only time it would be problematic is if you really wanted to use a player as a leading soloist, which is not recommended for so many reasons, the bleed through actually not being the most important of the reasons. So overall DS is one of my favorite libraries.
As for the demos above, they all sound very good, though I do agree that Synchron has a few choppy-sounding moments. I don't want to point the finger at your programming or at VSL's programming, but overall that's what I'm hearing. The shorts, however, are really some of the best out there!
Summarizing, I agree. 😊
Bravissimo! If there is any demonstration that has convinced me of the value of the Syncron approach, it is your Holberg simulation. It is the best of its kind I have heard anywhere. You should give classes on orchestral simulation.
I agree with most comments made by others, but I take a different perspective. The sharpness, clarity and "fattiness" of the sound here are such a welcome improvement in sampling. I've spent hours trying to imprint these qualities in my simulations, with very mixed results. It will be easier, I think, to shave off and blur the sharpness than it was to improve the sharpness of more sloppy sounds. To use a cryptic formula, it's always easier to do less with more, than to do more with less.
A last note: I have never heard any simulation that could really stand up the comparison with a top notch orchestra. In this case, I listened to Karajan directing the Berlin Philharmonic in the Holberg Prelude, and I must say that your simulation held up very strongly. Not perfect, OK, but extremely convincing, with a sound envelope that is very dense and lifelike. Now, the challenge is to humanize and blur the contours, an easier task than trying to make blurry stuff more incisive. Once again: bravissimo!
Bravissimo! If there is any demonstration that has convinced me of the value of the Syncron approach, it is your Holberg simulation. It is the best of its kind I have heard anywhere. You should give classes on orchestral simulation. I agree with most comments made by others, but I take a different perspective. The sharpness, clarity and "fattiness" ofthe sound hereare such a welcome improvement in sampling. I've spent hours trying to imprint these qualities in my simulations, with very mixed results. It will be easier, I think, to shave off and blur the sharpness than it was to improve the sharpness of more sloppy sounds. To use a cryptic formula, it's always easier to do less with more, than to do more with less. A last note: I have never heard any simulation that could really stand up the comparison with a top notch orchestra. In this case, I listened to Karajan directing the Berlin Philharmonic in the Holberg Prelude, and I must say that your simulation held up very strongly. Not perfect, OK, but extremely convincing, with a sound envelope that is very dense and lifelike. Now, the challenge is to humanize and blur the contours, an easier task than trying to make blurry stuff more incisive. Once again: bravissimo!Thank you for the kind words, and yes actually I totally agree with your point, easier to do less with more, than the opposite!
fatis
Somehow I missed this - it is truly excellent! The Dimension Strings pieces sound so good they should be VSL demos - they are basically a perfect performance and mix sound. And they have the wonderful intimate quality that the Dimension strings can give, which is totally unlike other sample libraries which usually are massive numbers of players in a block. It is a very "musical" performance showing a great amount of sensitivity and delicate phrasing.
Interesting to notice how when the Synchron performance starts, at first with the very fast short notes it sounds outstanding, perfect - and then when the high legato violin line comes in it instantly identifies itself as "SAMPLED." Too bright, even shrill, the legato not natural-sounding, no sense of the individual players. If the same line was done with humanized Dimension Strings it would sound perfect probably. But that is not a criticism of your performance, it is an aspect of the library which is different. Your performances are fantastic and show a real expertise and musicality - some of the best I've heard!
fatis
Somehow I missed this - it is truly excellent! The Dimension Strings pieces sound so good they should be VSL demos - they are basically a perfect performance and mix sound. And they have the wonderful intimate quality that the Dimension strings can give, which is totally unlike other sample libraries which usually are massive numbers of players in a block. It is a very "musical" performance showing a great amount of sensitivity and delicate phrasing.
Interesting to notice how when the Synchron performance starts, at first with the very fast short notes it sounds outstanding, perfect - and then when the high legato violin line comes in it instantly identifies itself as "SAMPLED." Too bright, even shrill, the legato not natural-sounding, no sense of the individual players. If the same line was done with humanized Dimension Strings it would sound perfect probably. But that is not a criticism of your performance, it is an aspect of the library which is different. Your performances are fantastic and show a real expertise and musicality - some of the best I've heard!
Thank you William. Yes I agree with your comment: I had big pleasure with some of the library features (mostly shorts and consistency) while some trouble with long notes. My main issue is I can't really use the cc11 at the extent I can do in VI, due to the wet tail being impacted. I'm also missing the power in high velocity, because in my opinion they move to "harsh" before reaching the full fff sound. For the rest I think they have pretty good applications.
I just want to say, that the dimension strings sound so well, incredibly well. Respect! And what I heard from other music done with Dimension Strings that's for sure not only the library but also the way it is used. Very good.
Thank you very much, and about synchron, I agree: in my humble opinion the main issue is the reverb management. The release samples and the algorithmic reverb are producing some strange effects in fast passages and long notes cross fading as well. I always find better for fast music turning the reverb off, avoid the release overlapping in legatos, and let the release ring as much as possible at the same level of the last sound to keep synchron stage natural reverb audible.