@William said:

It is NOT more flexible or more powerful.  It is just a different interface that is all.  It is  personal preference whether one uses it or not.  Don't elevate mere preference into a fact. 

With VI one can control EVERY PARAMETER OF MIDI in an elegant setup with all needed controls upfront.  You have stated VI is "laborious" - it is not "laborious" at all with the proper templates, but rather is very easy and quick to use.   And MIR, the companion to VI,  is the easiest of all to use of any professional software I have ever encountered.  

And please don't start lecturing me on Synchron like I am a beginner - your normal mode of dealing with everyone.  I already have Synchron and think it is very good.  As I stated this was simply a supportive statement about VI, not about putting down Synchron.  

Hi William, since there have been times we were able to discuss reasonable, I still think we both will be able to comunicate as respectful as this forum deserves it.

So let me start exactly with that: I respect totally your personal preference for the workflow you have developed over ther years with VI I think we both consent, that there is still by far no other sampleplayer from any other competitor ready to compete VI in any way. It is tremendouspowerful, and versatile.

There are three aspects which I personally esteem in Synchron as even more powerful:

• While VI is basedf on a more or less two dimensional Matrix systemthe Treestructure of Synchron opens up x⁸ as much possible ways top combine patches in certain 8 different "dimensions" of the same preset. In my humble opinion that is just "more".
• VI provides for each "cell" one option to X-fade selected Patches in a special slot for that function. In Synchron you can chose up to xfade through each "Dimensioon" what gives at least the option to X-Fade with the same patch in multiple directions that is just "more" than one.
• The mixer in Synchron is full featured and as such in nearly every detail accessible for seperate midi-conmtrole (as most other functions to) this is just "more" than the Pan and volume options of the VI-.Mixer

I will stop here to avoid what you might judge as lecturing and hope I havend took more text than you just to indicate my point of view. While Of course the fact, that the Symchron-Player is still un vivid develpoment makes it very resonable if we the users discuss exactly what we like and what we expect the Player should do. So if there is anything Synchron currently is not able to and anyone of us might regard as necessary feature. I think now is the best time to discuss that.

So please dont think I would have any interest to dispute your standpoint. It is just the exchangfe of oipnions and diffderent personal views which can be of iumportants for the further development of the VSL-Products and thats in my humble opinion a good reason to discuss detailed and concrete.

Dear Fahl, I agree 100% that Synchron player is an elegant and powerful system, but I don't think it's "more" than VI for the reason you listed, and your description was not very accuarate, sometime incorrect:

@Another User said:

• The mixer in Synchron is full featured and as such in nearly every detail accessible for seperate midi-conmtrole (as most other functions to) this is just "more" than the Pan and volume options of the VI-.Mixer

No, the slot mixer of Synchron is exactly the same of VI Pro, it has just volume and pan. What you mention is the channels Mixer, because Synchron player is multichannel to manage multiple mics: the multichannel manager of VI Pro is VE, and VE Mixer has of course the same functions of Synchron, and more more more other functions of course!

Finally still lot of precise and professional features of VI Pro (e.g. scales and intervals, sample stretch, sequencing, divisi, humanizing etc.) are missing in Synchron of course, because they have slightly different targets and application, so I can't really understand why we should try to compare so different tools, but at the end, it's impossible to state that the actual version of Synchron is better than VI Pro today, in my very humble opinion of course, but also checking facts.

That’s a great analysis - also I think you clarified exactly what I hadn’t fully realized —— “In my opinion Synchron Player gives a bit more to people working with MIDI control keyboards, while VI Pro gives more to people programming with DAWs, even if both players can do both services.”. I think that is a very good observation and probably what I have been feeling as what I always do is detailed programming much like writing notated scores instead of performing.

Dear Fatis, dont take me wrong I see we consent in many aspects. Let me just try to indicate a few aspects I slightly differ in my personal understanding of the concept.

@Another User said:

Finally still lot of precise and professional features of VI Pro (e.g. scales and intervals, sample stretch, sequencing, divisi, humanizing etc.) are missing in Synchron of course, because they have slightly different targets and application, so I can't really understand why we should try to compare so different tools, but at the end, it's impossible to state that the actual version of Synchron is better than VI Pro today, in my very humble opinion of course, but also checking facts.

It is right that some of the features you mention are still not implremented. We will see what the further Development might bring. I do have the impression, that they ad as much features you might need to use the Libraries offered, and will ad new features as soon a new library will make that reasonable to have.

However no one is currently kept from using VI. It is already a great Player. Nevertheless to discuss what we would like to see in Synchron might contribute to focus the development of it and that is in my humble opinion of course a good reason for exchange our different understandings in a detailed discussion here.

I hope I was able to keep everything fine for you, even if I pointed on some different understandings in details.

They should have just built the mixing section to vipro.

The new player has (imo) more dis- than advantages.

@TFIS said:

The new player has (imo) more dis- than advantages.

Which exactly?

@TFIS said:

The new player has (imo) more dis- than advantages.

Which exactly?

Humanize gone

repetitions can't be edited

less control sources,

sequencer gone,

keyboard volume tracking gone,

mirx integration gone,

adjusting controller curves in sy-player is a pain in the ass,

scale editor gone,

remote app gone,

master release switch gone,

A/B switch gone,

"auto" voicing gone (which was never  "divisi"),

standalone mode gone...

 

just to name a few without looking too deep into the details.

@Another User said:

just to name a few without looking too deep into the details.

You might be right in some aspects. meanwhile the Synchron-Player is young and is presumably growing with each new library available for it.

To sum up: I understand and share your apreciation for VI which is in many aspects impressivly full of reasonable features, while I also like the large additional felxibilioty and power of the new concept, which nevertheless will need its time to unfold up to the same maturity the VI has already reached. Still I think the fundamental advantages available with the new concepts deserve to be patient to let the synchron Player develop likewise in the next years.

@fahl5 said:

Where exactly should that end up?

"Oh please VSL do not improve anything you ever did, just always sell the same thing and release every year the same products again and again"

Is that what you are looking for?

Not at all. It seems you didn't read or didn't understand what has been (by the way clearly and in details) written. Or maybe your post is just an off-topic provocative sarcasm?

It is a simple and plain question, which you did not answer at all with your wild speculations what I personally in your opinion alledgly have read or not. Just stay with the topic and already posted arguments of the thread and answer my question related to them (and not what ever you try to insinuate to my person).

OK to make it a bit easier for you:

To ask for more VI, is kind of rejecting the Synchron-Series VSL is just starting to launch for which they spend very much hard work to develop major steps ahaed in usability, versatility and quality is kind of rejecting all the work which they already spent to present their customurs major and fundamental improvements of the products provided by VSL. In short it is as if you just reject all the effort they have done to improve what they sell. So what should that end up. What improvement should that be, if you dont want the improvement they in reality are currently on the way to introduce.

Beside some Ideas of rare hiustoric instruments this thread at least has not answered this question.

So here is your chance to just put some light on the question what improvement you are exactly asking for.

First, holy smokes, did you wake up on the wrong side of the bed? Damn, and I thought I was the cranky one...

There are a few things that Synchron is lacking that VI offers and is so much more flexible. Most notably, the humanization feature in Instruments pro. This small thing makes every performance different, and more importantly, adds a human element to compositions. In a teaching capacity, it is so useful to be able to set the humanization feature to something extreme and play back a composition for students so they can hear the difference between a professional orchestra and a high school performance. I have found it useful to demonstrate how important intonation is.

I will also say, since I am not that familar with synchron (I have the full orchestra thingy they just released), the UI does NOT work for me. Personally, to start with, the colour scheme and the bubbly buttons feels fisher price to me (as in, it feels like a toy).  Instruments Pro INSTANTLY connected with me. While I wish Instruments Pro had colour theming options, the layout is immediately understandable to me. I also like to have seperate synchron windows for each instrument, like I do with Instruments Pro.

I will tell you where synchron stands apart is the effects. A user can create pads that are just magnificent for the price of around $100. I am actually stunned that with using the existing libraries, these kind of sounds are possible.

I might be wrong here, Im not as familar with Synchron, but what I like about VI is the provided templates and matrices. I can load up a flute ensemble matrix and all my articulations are there. Sure Synchron has this, but what I cant seem to figure out how to do is remove articulations I rarely use. To put it bluntly, the matrix system in VI works for me, the linear setup in Synchron does not.

They each have their own strengths and weaknesses, to each their own.

Now, I have been RAILING about Vienna sampling ethnic instruments. Bagpipes, pan flutes, that weird Indian guitar thingy you hear in just about every middle east song (haha, sorry, cant remember what its called, no offense intended), even some ethnic percussion might be nice (if there is one area Vienna is lacking even in modern instruments is percussion).

This isnt a one camp against another. You dont need to defend one product verses another, nor do you need to defend Vienna verses another company. They all have unique benefits. Where Synchron is great for more fluid background instrumentation, VI is about being the center piece of a composition. While Vienna is mostly fantastic, their percussion lacks the punch sometimes needed for more dynamic compositions, requiring the use of *gasp* other percussion from other companies. While Vienna's choirs sound great, they lack many of the features found in other more modern choir libraries (I am SO in love with 8dio's silka and insolidus choir libraries). Vienna's guitar libraries are not my first go to for a guitar, there are others that far surpass Vienna.

That being said, in my opinion, Vienna, for core orchestra instruments, beats the competition, hands down. Sure, they dont have all the articulations other libraries have, but they have the 99% that are necessary, and they have the UI to match. For the love of God, I HATE KONTAKT. If that wasnt clear enough, I HATE KONTAKT! Its awful. I use it because I have to, but its terrible.

Where was I? Oh right, Synchron and VI. I think of VI and VE as the command centers of a composition and I think of Synchron orchestra as the thing sitting over to the side playing the background pads.

For reference, my purchased products include special edition core 1-4 and special edition 1 plus strings, synchron orchestra, mirx teldex & grassier hall (umm, the big hall, I dont know how to spell it), and instruments pro.

@Another User said:

Sure, they dont have all the articulations other libraries have, but they have the 99% that are necessary, and they have the UI to match.

You might be right if you are talking about the just started Synchron Series I am sure they will be completed. If you would talk about the complete VSL program, I fear there is by far nothing with any comparable variety of articulations.

And yes I think the result of this thread has already be consented by others here: VI is great and Synchron is going to be even greater. And I am sure the more constructive and the more concrete the suggestions of the users here are the more they will help VSL to make Synchron exactly what the Users need it to be.

@choir ... something is coming ... The one who is Spitfire Customer received an email 2 or 3 days ago which leads to a YouTube video. It IS a choir which will be out soon and a gamechanger I heard from Mister X. WOW! ...

@LAJ said:

@choir ... something is coming ... The one who is Spitfire Customer received an email 2 or 3 days ago which leads to a YouTube video. It IS a choir which will be out soon and a gamechanger I heard from Mister X. WOW! ...

( It seems as if you have spoken to someone from the marketing-department oif Spitrfire 😉 )

I personally expect not that much more than esoreric pad-sounds from Spitfire (after all you can swell every sound to simulate that kind of "feeling"). What I have heard from the first teaser at least doesn't sound much like a anything what might be for the wordbuilding game really changing anything.....

Perhaps if Audiobro will provide once upon a time more than their Children-Choir it might become interesteing, Nevertheless I would still prefer to have the Vienna voices with textsimulation.

1. There are people looking for Vienna to be additive to their already existing compositions. Enter Synchron.

2. Others are looking for Vienna to be their main library, that is VI.

3. The humanization feature works with ensembles in VI, so there is no reason it couldnt work in Synchron, it just is not there for whatever reason. In VI, choosing a 6 piece ensemble simulates 6 individual players and each note played will have unique characteristics. Synchron would need to do the same thing, but on a bigger scale.

4. The original response was quite rude. The question I asked was a rhetorical one that warranted no response. The purpose of the question was to point out that the response was rude, whether you saw it that way or not and furthers the conversation by stating that kind of response was unwarranted and uncalled for.

Random thoughts: I am not for one product verses another and I think that is where you missed the point. If you look at the development from Vienna this past year, it has all centered around Synchron. The point of the original post was to suggest that Vienna should not forget about Vienna Instruments. In fact, I could be wrong (I had open heart surgery earlier this year so I was out of commission for quite some time between March and June), but I dont recall seeing any products for VI this year. Looking at the archived news from this year (https://www.vsl.co.at/en/News/News_Archive), my suspicion is all but confirmed, every new product listed here is for Synchron.

I understand you like Synchron. That is great. Use whatever works for you. Some of us however prefer VI and certainly, if the plan is to end of life VI and move everything to Synchron, I and I am sure many others, will be sadly disappointed.

Hi littlewierdo

Sorry I fear I could not really understand what or whom exactly you are answering (especially Point 4 but that seems not that important for the main subjkect of this topic). So I try to answer some of your points.

I also do not really understand, what the decision to use VSL as additional or Main orchestral Library have to do with the Player one uses. I personally use currently the Synchron-Libraries as my main Core-Libraries adding VI-Libraries where ever it is necessary. But we all know and no one will ever dispute that  everyone will develop his very personal setup and workflow.  But that will of course be no reason for any developer to stop any development.

Concerning the humanization-discussion: It was just my humble assumption, why VSL doesn't provide any humanization-feature yet. I may be wrong but to me it still seem to be a convincing argument, that a single aberration aplied simultaneously exactly in the same way to a whole section, might be not what this feature originally way made for. Perhaps anyone of VSL could help to make this point more clear for us all, if I am wrong.

However, I think there is no need for any concerns, that VI will disapear that soon. No one is kept from buying and using the large variety of good Libraries in VI-Format. But you are right, the Synchron-Series does not yet seem to be complete, so it would not surprise me, if the next releases to come will be likewise Synchron-Releases. And I believe a constructive and concrete discussion about what users like to see in their Sample-Player will help VSL to bring their Users what they are looking for. As I am sure the Synchron-Player will have still be develoiped further to satisfy most of the possible Users in their needs.

In any way keep positive I think there is more than enough reason for 😉

@Another User said:

"I slept and woke up pretty well 😉 No one is the "cranky" one and I fear this question even does not contribute anything reasonable here."

Now read point 4 again.

This conversation isnt about Synchron and whether it should be used or not. The incomplete libraries and feature differences will be filled out. The conversation is about users who prefer VI over Synchron for many reasons, many of which have been listed, and the many users who want Vienna to continue to develop both product lines, not just Synchron, as they have done the past year.

You seem to be arguing that (despite the missing features and missing libraries - for purposes of this discussion, lets assume they both had the same features and complete libraries) Synchron is a better product. What I am telling you is, there are people who prefer VI, purely because the UI works for them.

I have mentioned before, but its worth stating again, when the UI gets in the way of my producing, for whatever reason, even if it is my own hangups, it doesnt matter how good a sound library is. Such is the case with Synchron. Both VI and Synchron could be at parody, that is, both having complete libraries and the same feature set, and the UI in Synchron just doesnt work for me. Nothing will change that except perhaps using Synchron more to get used to it... which leads me to another point...

Being that the sound libraries are completely seperate doesnt really help me use Synchron more. All of the products offered for Synchron, with exception to the orchestra one they just released (and I purchased) are all out of my price range, which also doesnt help. Personally, I dont understand the difference between the two, other than, one has a terrible UI with missing functionality and lacking libraries (which I understand will be eventuallly added) and the other (VI) has all the features and libraries for my taste.

Also a bit confusing, given the above, I already have the Special Edition libraries, I dont understand why I am paying $100 for those libraries to be synchro'd, other than some of the effects are really nice (the only reason I paid for the recent orchestra thingy they just released).

@Another User said:

Being that the sound libraries are completely seperate doesnt really help me use Synchron more. All of the products offered for Synchron, with exception to the orchestra one they just released (and I purchased) are all out of my price range, which also doesnt help. Personally, I dont understand the difference between the two, other than, one has a terrible UI with missing functionality and lacking libraries (which I understand will be eventuallly added) and the other (VI) has all the features and libraries for my taste.

Also a bit confusing, given the above, I already have the Special Edition libraries, I dont understand why I am paying $100 for those libraries to be synchro'd, other than some of the effects are really nice (the only reason I paid for the recent orchestra thingy they just released).

I think that the major reason to introduce the synchron-concept is not the transformation of exsiting libraries into synchronized ones (meanwhile that would imho make many things easier for instance for the Dimension-Series). The main reason as I understood are even much more detailed, mach nore powerfull Libraries, than those we already have in VI-Format, as the Synchron-Strings I or Synchron Percussion I provide already in their first Volumes so incredible much more than the corresponding VI Libraries (Orchestryl Strings I, and Orchestral Percussions.

In so far I personally understand, why VSL does not stick with an old concept but introduce a more powerful and more focussed one to make it possible to musically reasonably handle much more of important details of the sound. But you are right this is at the same time a challenge for the user to explore and learn the new power and adapt it to his own workflow.

At least I am glad that you found with the smart orchestra a product suitable for your needs and already found out some feature which are inspiring for you. However the fact the the development of Synchron-Series is just starting to be released, while the development of VI has already come to a point which does not allow in essential aspects as much improvement as the new concept makes me (even if I apreciate the existing libraries as we all do here) just arguing for staying open minded for the new to come,

 

About humanization I'm really surprised reading (insistently) so misleading statements:

- is maybe Synchron player supposed to run sections only? Well not at all! Smart Orchestra has solos already... so humanization is requested in Synchron indeed...

- of course humanization pitch shift has limited use in standard sections playback but only if used in an ignorant (or simply default) way. If used properly, (it has several features for using different curves and customized delay) it can improve the realism creating subtle time and pitch difference in any section of the strings orchestra, and acting as an "attack modulator".

It was just my humble assumption (no "statement" as you put it), since as far as I know the "humanization"-Feature was introduced with the Dimensions-Serie where recordings of the single players of an ensemble constitute the sound ot the whole ensemble and in this context it seems to me at least from its Idea most plausible, since the small detuned abberations of the humanization-feature makes (as far as I understood) sens as far they provide that always changing small detune-effecxts you hear only you in the ensemble which is playing the same note but for small individual intonation-differences produce those phaseshifting effects we associate with orchestral section-sounds.

For solo-instruments there is as I understand it no reason to produce those differences since the natural human attack is already recorded with the violinist who plays the tones who makes our patches. The problems only began if you double this soloist and get exactly the same human abberations twice when you let play the same note with the same patch simultaneaously, which would not produce the wanted ensemble phaseshift As far as I understood the traditional way to avoid any machine-effects for single instruments is round robin. So even if the smart orchestra includes Solo-patches, it still does not include dimension-series-instruments and does not have that much need for dimension-series features.

Nevertheless I would wellcome to have the dimension strings in Synchron-Player and if they would ever do so, I expect they will also introduce the humanisation-feature to. But that is of course all just my personal guess and only one point of view among others which one might contribute to this discussion here.

And I am sure the people of VSL are much more able to give you the reason, why neither the percussion, nor the piano, the section-strings  nor the smart-orchestra seemed to make it necessary for them to introduce this feature. I at least strongly believe, that if they would have had any good reason to do so, they would have done already. But if you think they dont, feel free to 'teach' them what you think you know better than the VSL-Developpers.

@fahl5 said:

 But if you think they dont, feel free to 'teach' them what you think you know better than the VSL-Developpers.

This is actually what you constantly did, not me. Actually you do it in this case also, since they implemented the feature in VI, and so according your expert advice, they had not to do it. 

Quote from VI Pro Manual:

"The Humanize Area creates something wonderful: Human Imperfection. From subtle changes in intonation to simulating stressinduced tuning corrections and slightly un-tight rhythmic passages: Random patterns produce authenticity, be it in the string, woodwind or brass section. Additionally to these fixed variations, you can influence the intensity of the tuning curves and delay settings to create an even more random effect with real-time controllers."

On the other side, if you are the only one with a different opinion from several other people, probably there is a reason... find your favorite one, respectfully if you can.

@Another User said:

On the other side, if you are the only one with a different opinion from several other people, probably there is a reason... find your favorite one, respectfully if you can.

Since the decision what feature should be included is not mine you should say that to the VSL-Developpers.

However in a discussion since everybody just talks for himself, no one is ever more or less "the only one" as no one in a rormal discussion need, could and should ever pretend to talk for anyone else but for himself. In short: you have your Ideas I do have mine. I respect yours so I can't see any rational reason why you should not be able to respect mine.

So please try finally to keep this discussion being concentrated on the subject and prevent it to become personal again.