What is the concept behind the VI´s

[Gagga 3.0]

Hello,

i just had a loong disccusion with a client of mine.
He really loves the new VI´s and surelly will get them. He has now 4 Gigastudios with the old VSL´s on it and he loves the idea to have a whole orchestra sitting there 24/7. He absolutly disslikes the free memory function because he thinks of the the Instruments as a orestra sitting there and waiting for his orders. Thats the sittution as it is right now.

Now is the Question who we can rebuild this settup with the new VI´s

He likes the idea to have all artikulation in one instruments but the problem is that one instruments is (as it seams) not multitimbral. That means he can play all kinds of artikulations but as it seams he canot play multible artikulations with different notes at the same time. Is that right?
To do that he sayes he would at least need 2 Instances of each instrument, which doubles the need of the amount of ram.
We both see the VSL VI as a major project in the direction of a full virtuall orchestra and that the technical sources we have today are simply not enough but will change very soon when vista comes out and server mainboards can hold up too 32GB of ram but that will take at least about 2 years from now. PC´s apps can hold up to 2.7GB of ram and Mac´s something like 3.5GB but we need 25GB for the whole orchestra or so.

So, is there a workaround to make VI´s multimbral or lets say multiartikulal?
Will there ever be a VSL Plattform like Gigastudio where sounds can be shared (for example when loading Instruments 2-3 time?), or at least will the VI be multitimbral?

Or in other words what is the VSL concept for us user to realise a whole orchestra to be right on our fingertips (words are stolen from the EWQL manual, sorry! [:)]

As it is now the VI look more as an extension rather than a replacement.

Thanx for listening.

[Christian Marcussen]

@Gagga 3.0 said:

As it is now the VI look more as an extension rather than a replacement.

Well I for one doubt i'll ever use Pro Edition again after having set up the VI (still waiting for the final 5 collection). Its true you cant play two seperate articulations at the same time with the same instance. Similar to how its hard for a string player to play pizzicato and legato at the same time [:D]

That said I do agree that we need to be able to do this. And while loading two instances should be the answer it isent because loading the same samples twice would require twice the ram. The reason its constructed like this is that if you use the ram optimizer in one instance of the violins the VI would kick out the same samples in the other instance.

However a few of us have started a club saying that we dont mind it kicking out the other samples - that we prefere to be able to load first and second violins with the same articulations only taking up ram once. VSL haven't commented on if they will implement this but in my view its a no brainer.

So join the club [:)]

[golem]

VSL VI is a virtual instrument - not a virtual ochestra.
Modelled after the real thing, which is monophonic.
Tho you can stack them up to model an orchestra.

Nevertheless a single VI instance is polyphonic [up to 64 voices]
except where it has to adhere to Midi Rules, especially legato, which cannot be tracked reliably in poly playing (tho it is possible with some restrictions)

Our goal is indeed a complete orchestra under one hood.
But performance issues of current hardware set aside, it raises a hell bunch
of UI questions: how can this be easily handled?
A moderate sized orchstra consists of 40-50 musicians, ie instruments!

An approach to tackle this can't possibly be a realtime approach as in current
VI player, which was designed for realtime performance (which includes the recording of this performance with a sequencer, which is basically a realtime approach with editing optiions afterwards, however )

In my opinion (speaking as a composer) the obstacle for a total orchestral design are the host tools which are presently available: talking of the sequencer metaphor.

I have a couple of designs in my drawer but any of them would mean you had to let go of your current idea of how to make music.

Frankly speaking: the sequencers suck !

Christian Marcussen: Ah yes - the shared mem version (1.05) is already in our test labs.

Thanks

Christian Teuscher
development

[Christian Marcussen]

@golem said:

Christian Marcussen: Ah yes - the shared mem version (1.05) is already in our test labs.

Hot damn [:)]

I guess it actually matters to come with feedback - someones listening [:D]

Awesome.

[Gagga 3.0]

@golem said:

An approach to tackle this can't possibly be a realtime approach as in current VI player, which was designed for realtime performance (which includes the recording of this performance with a sequencer, which is basically a realtime approach with editing optiions afterwards, however )

I have a couple of designs in my drawer but any of them would mean you had to let go of your current idea of how to make music.

Frankly speaking: the sequencers suck !

Christian Marcussen: Ah yes - the shared mem version (1.05) is already in our test labs.

Dear Christian, thanx alot for the direct answere, i really apreciate this, this never hapend with Giga developer.

To start with the last sentence: Does this mean that when i load instruments twice that contain the same samples that they both have acces to the same samples and we dont need 2 times the ram???

That would be awsome!!!

To you next Sentence: no i was was speaking about the composers work with a sequencer as a composing tool, not about a realtime playing orchester where the composer would need 80 arms and keyboards to play it [[:)]] the fingertips thing was not ment in that way, it was ment to have an orchestra sitting there an wait for your input on by one!!! But they are all still waiting together at the same time does not mean they all need to play togehter.
[[:)]]
But wouldnt it be a good start to be able to play multi articullar?
That would very easy to do at leat in the UI this would only need lets say a 8 square bar with 8 numbers coresponding to 8 midi channels, and each square you click you choose the UI you see for a articulation while the others are would be still playble but not editable. Maybe even 4 losts would be enough.

Does this make sense???

[golem]

hm, interesting ...

stay tuned. As christian marcussen put it: someone is listening [:)]

christian teuscher

[Christian Marcussen]

Hi Gagga - of all the cool stuff VSL could add to their sampler, I can't quite see what you would use this 'multi articulator' for? Maybe I'm not understanding you correctly, but I fail to see its practical use (if the ram issues of loading two similar instances are fixed).

[hermitage59]

@golem said:

Frankly speaking: the sequencers suck !

Christian Teuscher
development

And that's the reason so many VI's are built with an externally enforced restriction, and i suspect frustration on the part of the VI developers. As users we should be open minded enough to understand it's not the instruments that present difficulties, but the basic workhorse we use to bring a performance into life. Steinberg, for example, gave us Cubase, a remarkable achievement in its time, and well ahead of even the performing musician's understanding of what was capable. Emagic's Logic was the same. We got the chance to perform with multiple instruments, and many of us with playing experience saw the potential of this, and embraced what was back then, advanced technology. We were beta testers almost continually, but didn't mind that, because each new incarnation would bring a better or faster way of working, and the companies in question listened to us, and interacted with the users to a much greater degree than they do now. (I feel like i've been reluctantly beta testing forever!)

But that software's getting old now, and there have been relatively few advances in concept, or new methods of inputting information. Even midi controllers are dated. We have a fairly common layout in most controllers. But that method's getting old too. Cosmetic changes try to keep a freshness in each release, but that's all they are, cosmetic.

Christian, i can only imagine what you WOULD have built, if you hadn't needed to keep current sequencers/software in mind.

The DAW developer who understands this, and leaps forward in new concepts, and ideas will get a big jump on the rest. I've read much about DAW developers blaming hardware, and vice versa, but the reality is they need to work together, and push forward at the same time with the same determination.

I made a comment some time ago about the restrictions built into MIDI, a great idea when it started, but now dated, and insufficient for the task of operating and performing with big libraries. For all our enthusiasm about harware advances, including the new potential for considerable blocks of RAM, we will still hit a wall when we try to combine big libraries, large RAM, powerful machines, and decidedly dated concepts of sequencer/DAW. MIDI 3 needs to come soon, and the sooner the manufacturers realise this, the sooner we get to take the next step forward.

Problem is, us users are still buying the current batch of sequencers and controllers, and modifying our performance method to workaround the restrictions imposed by the developers. ( the lack of Score development being my personal pet irritation)
If we ALL got writing, and sent a loud, continual, communal message to the software developers, it would not only wake them up to our needs, but have the potential to increase their profits. They're definitely falling behind, and in a way, i feel a degree of sympathy for gifted fellows, like Christian, who may find their vision narrowed by the tardiness of others. There's little doubt, having seen the VI come to life, that he and the team could have taken this so much further, even beyond the excellence of the current verision, if not for the dated delivery and performance systems.

I hope, not only for us users, but you guys developing tools for us, that we get new sequencers soon, unrestricted in RAM/CPU potential, intuitive, and specifically designed to handle today's large libraries (and advanced scoring capability!) with a view to the future, and the potential for even larger collections of articulations, and instruments.

Regards to you,

Alex.

[Gagga 3.0]

@Christian Marcussen said:

Hi Gagga - of all the cool stuff VSL could add to their sampler, I can't quite see what you would use this 'multi articulator' for? Maybe I'm not understanding you correctly, but I fail to see its practical use (if the ram issues of loading two similar instances are fixed).

You are right actually, i had this in my mind before i read about the memory thing. But it would still good to have all in one instrument???