1 tip you can try:

Copy your chamber violins midi track in your sequencer and slightly change some of the timings of the notes. Then transpose the copy of your chamber violins midi track up 1 whole step. Then pitch down a second instance of the chamber violins VI by 1 whole step with the pitch wheel. Combine the original track with this pitch shifted version. This will avoid any phasing issues and will make the first violins sound much fatter.

Best,
Jay

Thanks for the tip Jay

I can't get the Chamber String to respond to the pitch bend. I have the pitch bend set to 2oo cents, but it's not working. The track is receiving the midi - it recorded it - but the sound is not chamging pitch!

Any ideas why?

Right click on the big "pitch" knob on the lower left side of the instance. Choose "learn" then move your pitchwheel on your midi keyboard. That should do it.

--Jay

Thanks Jay, went brain dead there for a moment [:O]ops:

...or buy the orchestral strings. [H]

Guy, funny! I was just emailing you to thank you and say I'll be ordering the Orch Strings 1 tomorrow - thanks to you - do you think they'll give you a commission? [:D]

Nevertheless, for curiosity sake - I tried Jay's suggestion-as well as detuning the pitch bend so one was about 7 cents sharp, one 7 cents flat - it definitely fattened up and opened up the sound. If you can't afford the Orch Strings - that seems to be the best option.

I didn't find delaying the tracks to be of much benefit and chorusing was artificial sounding.

Thanks to all who helped and thanks Guy for your time!

My pleasure.

No, no commission, but herb promised me the Queen Elizabeth foghorn bassoon. [:D]

A small sidenote - it is a good habit to avoid equal amounts of detuning (like +7/-7) as you will run into audible artifacts more likely than with non-equal values. The Fibonacci-series is a good start for "clever" combinations of detuning amounts:

-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fibonacci_number
-> http://www.mcs.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/R.Knott/Fibonacci/fib.html

HTH,

Hi Dietz,

In actuality, I de-tuned one up 8 cents and one down 5 cents - just didn't feel right to do it symmetrically - that's why I said "about 7 cents". I wanted to keep things less articifial. So would that be in line with what you feel would be acceptable - regarding the Fibonacci-series? Or do you think it should be run through an lfo that would randomize the detuning?

Very good input, by the way. It's these small changes that make the track 'feel' better and can be used in many things for music tracks.

5 and 8 is a wise choice, according to the Fibonacci-series. Additional randomization by means of an LFO is another good idea, as long as you find a way to modulate the speed of the modulation itself, too.

Thanks Dietz,

That's interesting to know, 'cause in the past when I would try this it never really sounded good, probably because of what you're saying.

Hi,
Wouldn't it be possible to use the same midi file and substitute different VI samples (reconstitute matrix?) thus making it a different performance?
Also if you've got separation between instruments vary panning and as you've already done change ambiance (different reverb program or variation in room size). Also there are some good doubler plug-ins (waves doubler is one) that will accomplish what detuning would attempt to do but in a more sofisticated manner. Remember the story about how John lennon hated doubling his vocals and the Abbey Road guys came up with ADT (auto double tracking)?....same principle.