@antcarrier said:

A resizable interface for VI Pro would be nice 😉

Yes....that would be really nice 😄

The crossfading of articulation rather than the dicrete switch is a very compelling feature of Synchron.

EG: trem to sul pont trem

Also a patch which is set from low to high via this crossfade, set in its mixer spatially, low left to high right or vice versa, and additionally sends to reverb and other enhancements with a single CC is ground-breaking.

There is no audible difference between that and a crossfade between tremolo and sul pont tremolo routed through MIR in VE which is easy to do - just crossfade them in a VI slot.  

However, I have to say this is starting to be like Mac vs. PC and that kind of argument is fruitless.  

They are both good, and it just depends on your personal preferences of work. 

@William said:

However, I have to say this is starting to be like Mac vs. PC and that kind of argument is fruitless.

@William said:

There is no audible difference between that and a crossfade between tremolo and sul pont tremolo routed through MIR in VE which is easy to do - just crossfade them in a VI slot. 

There are for example dimensions with 3 bowing articulations, regular half trem, ponticello in FX Strings. In one dimension under Special pads, there appears a 4th, but I may have added that. #3 is vertical trem.
I'm aware of slot xfade, but isn't the A slot still going with B on top? At a certain point the higher slot isn't, in this.
I'm saying something affirmative, not negating anything, so it isn't argumentative saying I like something FFS.

@civilization 3 said:

There are dimensions with 3 articulations, trem, half trem, vertical trem, trem sul point in FX Strings.

I'm aware of slot xfade, but isn't the A slot still going with B on top? At a certain point the higher slot isn't, in this.

The first case you describe is not exactly a crossfade. It seems more a selection of separate articulations via a continuous controller. The listed articulation don't seem to be inherently made for crossfading. Trem <> half trem can be crossfaded, but vertical trem <> trem sul pont don't seem to have any relation in a continuous space.

In VI, two slots can be crossfaded. You can choose either to let the controller increase the volume of the B slot, or crossfade between A and B. This is only possible with two articulations.

Paolo

Well I was just talking about the often used orchestrational effect of a string group changing slowly from tremolo to sul pont tremolo - an effect heard commonly.  That can be done perfectly with a slot crossfade in VI. 

@William said:

Well I was just talking about the often used orchestrational effect

William, I'm sorry if I made confusion by inadvertently indirectly responding to you. What I was trying to say, is that the list of articulations in FX Strings, as written by Civilization, don't seem to fit in a traditional transition between articulations in a real orchestra. What is called "vertical trem", for example, should be what other call "vertical scrubs" or "spazzolato", a quick but smooth movement between tasto and pont, all in a single, repeated gesture.

Going from a "sul tasto", to "normal" or "ordinario", to "sul pont" is another matter, since this is, as you say, now considered common writing. With VI you can fade between two articulations. With SP you can do it with as many articulation as you like, but choosing is a dimension has to be "parallel" or "separate". In the first case, you can crossfade though the whole dimension (or tree branch).

Paolo

I've often struggled with one kind of case in which multi-mic live stage recordings can be somewhat of a hindrance.

If I want to alter an instrument's close mic sound creatively and perhaps even radically using various Fx, then the problem is of course that all the various ambient mics still 'give away' the instrument's original sound. Sometimes this doesn't matter much, but there are also cases when it really does matter and is definitely undesirable.

Depending on what kind and degree of creativity has been applied to the instrument as heard on the close mic(s), it may be difficult if not impossible to use Fx to make all the original ambient mic streams appear to be genuine ambient renditions of the modified close mic sound. In these cases I tend to do without the original ambient recordings for this instrument, and mock up some new ones based on the instrument's modified sound - while of course endeavouring to make these new ambiences stay in keeping with the qualities of the overall mix as derived from the original live stage.

I suppose what I'm talking about here is likely to be an edge case if not irrelevant for the great majority of traditional concert hall orchestral renditions. But I'm thinking it's very relevant to today's high-excitement, max impact, Fx-riddled movie and video game scores.

Apart for the differences between baked in reverb and added reverb in orchestral ensembles, my main concern is that I'm not always writing for a full orchestra needing a big hall reverb. I very often write for smaller ensembles, requiring a smaller venue.

The great thing of VI+MIR is that you can also customize the ambience, and choose the right one. Teldex or Synchron are the best for an orchestral movie soundtrack. But for the rendering of a classical piece, the Great Hall at the Konzerthaus Wien is a lot better. And the dry studios at the Funkhaus are excellent for more neutral prototypes. And there are pieces that absoutely ask for a church reverb.

So, I really hope there is hope for the future of Vienna Instruments.

Paolo

@civilization 3 said:

There are dimensions with 3 articulations, trem, half trem, vertical trem, trem sul point in FX Strings.

I'm aware of slot xfade, but isn't the A slot still going with B on top? At a certain point the higher slot isn't, in this.

The first case you describe is not exactly a crossfade. It seems...

whatever it seems to you, it's described by VSL thusly:

Parallel Mode

@PaoloT said:

What is called "vertical trem", for example, should be what other call "vertical scrubs" or "spazzolato", a quick but smooth movement between tasto and pont, all in a single, repeated gesture.

Going from a "sul tasto", to "normal" or "ordinario", to "sul pont" is another matter, since this is, as you say, now considered common writing. With VI you can fade between two articulations. With SP you can do it with as many articulation as you like, but choosing is a dimension has to be "parallel" or "separate". In the first case, you can crossfade though the whole dimension (or tree branch).

Paolo

If you set it up to crossfade from a different articulation to this, it crossfades, unless VSL is having us on with the word crossfade in the manual. You seem to think parallel isn't a crossfade, like slot crossfade is the only possible meaning. Parallel, if you think about it would afford this different quality as the one parallel w. the new one may fade out, which I think is not what slot crossfade does. 

You're trying hard to make an argument for the one against the other, but you're making suppositions and coming up with things which aren't real. That is argumentative, I wouldn't do one vs the other. One may more freely organize in VI Pro. You can, however re-organize the trees in SP but there are real hazards in functionality, ie., things which won't work.

Lest this thread turn into a circular debate about Synchron VS ViPro, I'd like to be so bold as to bring this thread back on to what I think is the crux of what PaoloT was originally trying to get at:

Dear VSL team,

For various reasons that have been stated throughout this thread, some of us prefer ViPro to Synchron, at least at this current time and state of both player's capabilities.  Furthermore, a lot of investment of time, energy and money has been placed in ViPro and the VI series by many.  

1. It's clear that these libraries will always be useful for those who enjoy using them (especially with MIR Pro), as pristine, 24-bit recordings don't "age".
2. It's clear that using the old VI stuff with the newer Synchron stuff (not talking about Synchron-ized here) is simply a matter of matching the venue in MIR Pro.
3. It's clear (to me, at least) that MIR Pro will not be made obsolete in any way by Synchron or Synchron-ized products because it can be used with any audio signal; its role can be much, much more than "just a way to link VI to Synchron".  It is ultimately a flexible spatialization tool, regardless of what you use it with.

What is not clear is whether or not VI Pro will be technically supported in the future.  Regardless of whether you add features, resizable GUI, or what not, I think the real concern of many (and what PaoloT originally asked) is whether or not it will simply work for years to come.  

What I mean is: do you plan to support it, however minimally, so that it works with VEP8?  VEP9?  Will you continue to update it so that it stays bug-free and reliable as OS's and DAWs develop?  Or will it be rendered unstable, clunky and unusable by the passage of time and be abandoned as legacy-ware?  I think it's a legitimate concern for those who've invested the time, energy, and money; no one wants to see thousands upon thousands of dollars suddenly just not work or not be technically supported anymore.  It certainly doesn't seem like that's the direction you're headed (i.e. Dim Strings III released for VI and Synchron), but without a direct statement from VSL, all that really remains is speculation, rumor, and hearsay - far from ideal when trying to decide where to spend potentially thousands of euros/dollars/etc.

Now, I'm relatively new to the sampling world and this crowd in general, but I've trawled through the forums and done my research: you (VSL) have an outstanding track record of responding and interacting with your customer base (myself included).  Unfortunately, you also took quite an unfairly vicious digital flogging during the pre-release of Synchron Strings (the internet can be real toxic sometimes) which I presume has shaped your policies about interacting with your customer base quite heavily.  Point is, if you are reading this but are unable, for whatever reason, to respond with any clear or affirmative response, that is completely understandable.  No one wants any messengers to get shot, after all.

To sum it up, if you can respond with any kind of assurance that VI Pro will not be functionally abandoned in the future, that would go a long way to allay concerns that many of us have.  If not, I (and others, I presume) ask that you take notice that these concerns exist and take them into consideration moving forward.

Have a good day, everyone!

- Sam

Hi Sam, 

Thanks for taking the time.  We see the concern, and there's no reason I can see why we would abandon VI PRO. It is a very powerful sample player that is ideal for our VI Collections. 

Best, 
Paul

@Paul said:

Hi Sam, 

Thanks for taking the time.  We see the concern, and there's no reason I can see why we would abandon VI PRO. It is a very powerful sample player that is ideal for our VI Collections. 

Best, 
Paul

Bingo, helpful answer.

And here you are. A new (pretty impressive relaunch in reality, not new recordings, but still new) entry in VI collections... SE Volume 5 "Dimension Strings".