@Thor said:

.....but if you have any experience standing in front of a real orchestra...if pop if classical if Film - the room that they are recorded in is always a crucial element of the sound - they never get recorded as dry as possible

And that's where you're wrong. I can think of at least one major studio where this is exactly the case; there is almost no room sound at all (in terms of echo). Oh, and yes, I have stood in front of an orchestra, maybe more often than you have [:D]

DG


You probably have stood in front of an orchestra a few times - you just didn't listen !! [:D]
t

Now you're just being insulting. I won't bother any more as it's obvious that I have more experience of orchestras than you do.

DG

@PaulR said:

Whoever said that it was necessary for a sample library to sound 'real'? What does that mean? Sample libraries are at best for convenience and speed of work and budgetary requirements.

Well,...okay then. You are right. Why don't you use the old Roland Orchestral samples...they should do it for you. Dry, unreaistic BUT fast to use.

And why spend so much money on VSL, if it isn't for the realism of the library ?For what reason ??

Are you sleeping ??

You just don't like to use your ears...my friend. That's not good. Not Good

DG,

you said "I have been standing in front of an orchestra more often than you"

when you start something like that...you have to be ready for a return...

I hear the VSL Solo Violin Legato patch....

HEY !! Don't take this so personal and serious...I am a fool and will always return in the same tone somebody attacks me...

but its all good, no pun intended. After all we are talking music here...and music is FUN.

So lets keep that spirit and stop telling each other who has more experience than others....

you don't know how many times I have been in front of an orchestra, I don't know that about you - so I won't speculate about it.

T

Thor,

I had this unrealistic, fictional thought in the past, never-the-less interesting idea that VSL should have 2 recordings for every sound, 1-The dry studio sound 2- Recorded in a good concert hall, so we could even feel the air surrounding the instrument, as crazy as that may sound, but I think you would know what I'm talking about... Of course that would take twice the memory, but I wouldn't mind having 5% of the product focused on concert hall recording. There are millions of dollars spent in making good concert halls done by some of the greatest engineers, all this to have the most natural sound, and VSL does not take advantage of this. So in my opinion you really only get half or at the most 3/4 of the natural sound.

@Thor said:

Well,...okay then. You are right. Why don't you use the old Roland Orchestral samples...they should do it for you. Dry, unreaistic BUT fast to use.
And why spend so much money on VSL, if it isn't for the realism of the library ?For what reason ??
Are you sleeping ??
You just don't like to use your ears...my friend. That's not good. Not Good

So much money on VSL? - that's funny. Have you any idea how much money gets spent on equipment over the years. And not only that - apply the 'Rule of 7' which roughly states you can double what you spent in terms of what things cost you - after 7 years. Like in 1971, I got a Mini Moog - cost £850 sterling - that's like £4.5K today. And I had 2. That doesn't include Hammond's and all the rest everything between say 1967 and now.

What does a real Hammond or a real Mini Moog sound like huh? I've heard real orchestras that don't sound real.

So much money to you now, may not seem like so much money in 20 years time. One of the most irritating things I've seen here over the last 4 days or so, is the preposterous notion that - if I can't afford it - then no other bugger can either. Get my drift?

And besides, I won't be getting this whole VI. I don't need all of that. I will buy what is necessary to me and as time goes by, I will maybe pick up more items along the way.

What DG said about live orchestral recordings often being done as dry as possible is a good point. In the studio days of Hollywood, this was always the case. An entire orchestra would be recorded as dry as bone. This is obviously still true when a composer/engineer wishes to alter the sound after the fact.

There are two basic philosophies to recording (sorry to lecture about something Dietz learned before birth, but I'm making a point): (1) is to be absolutely faithful to the sound within its environment and reproduce the experience of being there as perfectly as possible. This can be seen most clearly in the practice of recording engineers of the 1950s, who sometimes would use just one perfectly placed mic to record an entire symphony and almost nothing would be done to the sound after those sessions except splicing and disc-pressing; (2) is to get an extremely accurate reproduction of a specific sound in isolation from its environment, so that it can be mixed and manipulated with other sounds. A soundman on a film production with a shotgun mic takes this approach in the extreme, but it is also seen with sampling of the kind VSL does, in which the room is so dry and quiet that it is designed to be mixed with later, added-on room or hall environments.

....when you record a 40 piece Orchestra in a Studio - its still not as dry as on a silent stage...the room sound is still part of the orchestral sound - roommics are always used and a violin section is not close miked as in 1 inch above the instrument so the room even in Hollywood is part of the sound which is what I have been saying all along. And if you record an Orchestra in a bad sounding room (like the seattle orch)...it sounds bad !!

You cannot get a good orchestra sound, if you have 40 people sitting in a shitty sounding room...even if you try to record it as dry as possible and add verb later. Why is this being argued so much ??

I give up....

T

@Thor said:

You cannot get a good orchestra sound, if you have 40 people sitting in a shitty sounding room...even if you try to record it as dry as possible and add verb later. Why is this being argued so much ??
T

I won't argue with that - and haven't done so.

@Guy said:

Thor,

I had this unrealistic, fictional thought in the past, never-the-less interesting idea that VSL should have 2 recordings for every sound, 1-The dry studio sound 2- Recorded in a good concert hall, so we could even feel the air surrounding the instrument, as crazy as that may sound, but I think you would know what I'm talking about... Of course that would take twice the memory, but I wouldn't mind having 5% of the product focused on concert hall recording. There are millions of dollars spent in making good concert halls done by some of the greatest engineers, all this to have the most natural sound, and VSL does not take advantage of this. So in my opinion you really only get half or at the most 3/4 of the natural sound.

...you can't say this in this forum because ...next thing you know...people start throwing tomatoes at you.

I think you make an excellent point about how much time and expertise is being put into building these Halls...

I know somebody will mention MIR...in a second...

Plus, everybody disagrees with me on the fact that the room an orchestra is recorded in affects the sound - even when recording as "dry" as possible. As for me I haven't heard any recordings (and I am talking premix stage) that were DRY (meaning no room artifact - the engineer that can pull that off will win a grammy). The VSL is the dryest I have heard and even they have roomsound on it. The roomsound that I am not so fond of...ouch...here comes a tomato flying..ouch...

okay okay,...the roomsound is great...stop throwing those tomatoes...I surrender..


...hehe [:D]

@Thor said:

Plus, everybody disagrees with me on the fact that the room an orchestra is recorded in affects the sound - even when recording as "dry" as possible.

Hello again!

I don't disagree at all with that statement, ideally the sound of the instruments should be allowed to develop in a great sounding room before it hits the mics. But if you require control over that sound later on, to place it in different spaces, then surely there has to be some compromise in order to remove some of that 'bigger room' sound at the recording stage. Let's be honest, though people are using VSL for large scale recordings, just as many are using solo instruments or small ensembles that require a smaller space, and you do get the best (compromise, I agree) of both worlds by having the samples delivered in this way.

As you're obviously so finnicky (I mean that in the nicest possible way), I'm genuinely interested to know what you are currently using for orchestral and small ensemble mock-ups. Is there any better than VSL or is this just a technical (in a perfect world) discussion? Again, I don't mean to be rude, I just get the impression from your posts that there is something better that we're all missing out on.

Glad you've calmed down now, it's just getting interesting. [:)]

Colin

@Thor said:

You cannot get a good orchestra sound, if you have 40 people sitting in a shitty sounding room...even if you try to record it as dry as possible and add verb later. Why is this being argued so much ??

I wouldn't argue this either. My point is that absolute sound freaks that I know and I mean totally anal freaks who have been written up in articles as sonic experts, love VSL. Listen to Mike Andrews score for Orange County which did a lot of recording at Capital for that classic room sound. He just bought Opus 1+2 on my recomendation without hearing a single patch. He loves it. No way would he miss hearing something with a shit room on it. But tons of verb would have bummed him out because it takes his job and creativity away from him.

So maybe a difference of opinion ear-wise here, which is fair enough.


Edit: Mattias Henningson actually quoted me which means I can now retire having attained this new important status.

@Thor said:

The VSL is the dryest I have heard and even they have roomsound on it. The roomsound that I am not so fond of...ouch...here comes a tomato flying..ouch...

okay okay,...the roomsound is great...stop throwing those tomatoes...I surrender..

...hehe [:D]

When the tomatoes hits us, should we reconstruct scientifically the squashy sound through all kinds of EQs and reverbs? Which reverb? Room reverb?Cathedral reverb? Grand Canyon reverb? I would ad a high squash filter for some real "juicy" effects. Although I hear "Squash filter II" is coming out soon...We may still have to crossfade with "Ripped Peaches modulator III" for a more natural attack. And if it doesn't sound great we don't have to say that we wanted to record a tomato. [:O]ops:

I will confess, the VI is worth every dollar. And yes, the Pro edition owners come out on top it's true. Although, I still understand completely peoples issues with the upgrade "path". At the end of the day it really does look extraordinarily amazing. I'll buy it, when I get my payment on sale of my soul (still ah, ahem, still waiting for that one)
[:'(]

And hey I hope I'm not counted as one of the crazy boatmen of the frenzied sea of industrial contempt?!!

A question: Will the discounts still apply for pro edition owners in 12/24 months?? as that is when I'll be able to afford the upgrade [*-)]

The discounts are not time limited.

best
Herb

Thanks Herb.

Well, count me in. It's worth it. They're amazing tools AMAZING. And I don't think there is any comparison to other products out there.

I think the reason people are upset about the upgrade path is that they are not realising the depth and scope of the new products yet. It's not just an interface, or one that makes your existing computer work like a new machine with 10 times the RAM in it, but it's a lot of new samples not released and in fact an entirely different product to the Pro edition, and you're taking care of those customers by way of the extended edition discount which is in fact a good discount if you take everything into account. It's expensive but so is a bentley and bentley owners don't complain about the price!

Miklos.

Herb,

Just by curiosity, do you actually read every single post?? It must be hard to keep up with this board? And if you don't mind me asking, how do you cope with the negative posts?

Which negative posts?

[:P]

@herb said:

Which negative posts?

OMG. My hero. [:O] [:D]

Very interesting discussions. Brainstorming often creates new ideas and a help to others getting familiar with whats normal. Would'n it be nice if One day VSL will make a MIDI box with multiple 16 chanells of outputs, called a Model, and all problems are over. As of the present, you cannot find any library or model that will stand up to SC. The discussion about reverb is scaled to what kind of music you are producing. Classical piano is so dynamic, that you cannot apply any effects to it. It uses all of the dynamics from 0 - 127. Any effects added will kill the dynamics. hence forth the Orchestral genre. It also uses all of the dynamics, and you now are using all of the instruments man has to offer on top of it. therefore, if you start with any reverb in the patch, then you have taken all of your dynamics or air for creating music. classical mainly. So far because of limited ram usage and computer power. VSL has been exposed justifiably with small ensambles. and the results are stunning. I now can hear the real players playing off notes. where before one was used to it. Using VSL is perfect tune on every instrument especially the string instruments which has no frets. Back to the ram usage and instrument mangment. It appears that this new upgrade not only gives 24 bit. But also multiple instruments usage which ofsets the Ram and power problem. I'm very reluctant in spending money, but is there really anybody else offering it all.
The next time I'm getting a chance on some money. i know exactly what to spend it on. By the way, for all you dick heads out there,You've got nothing on me. I'm the wackiest master of them all, from the old day's. I'm having a gerritol party today before I write. Nothing like the olden day's.