Vienna Symphonic Library Forum
Forum Statistics

200,726 users have contributed to 43,209 threads and 259,123 posts.

In the past 24 hours, we have 3 new thread(s), 8 new post(s) and 56 new user(s).

  1. Home
  2. Sample Libraries
  3. Vienna Instruments Libraries (legacy)
  4. Do former Logic EXS users now prefer Vienna Instruments?

  • Do former Logic EXS users now prefer Vienna Instruments?

    P
    P
    I bought the entire VSL Library in the previous format for EXS 24 (Complete Orchestral Package+Horizon) and now am contemplating an upgrade to the Vienna Instruments (which I gather give more articulations and 24 bit quality). This would cost me about £3000 after the discounts I am due. To buy the new instruments I want would cost even more. I also assume I'd need to buy some serious extra Hard Drive space.

    A year or two back it seemed that there was a consensus on this forum that the optimum way to achieve a large number of instruments in Logic Pro was to use Redmatica's EXS Manager and the Sample Merge feature. I put a considerable amount of time aside to a) set all this up b) create customised Key-Switching patches etc 3) study the library and learn how to use it. Having done all this I basically got down to some happy composing work and was naturally reluctant to make the switch to the Vienna Instruments and have a whole new time-consuming learning curve and expense. I was however, more recently tempted into buying Vienna Instruments 'Orchestral Strings 1' so as to qualify for free preview samples of the 'Appassionata Strings'.

    Am I alone in remaining somewhat mystified as to how this Vienna Instrument works? Maybe I'm old-fashioned but one of the things that inspired me to get to grips with VSL initially was that the package included some very nice documentation in a printed booklet that explained everything nicely. The Vienna Instruments I bought came with no such documentation and for some reason I've never really understood the interface. I watched the video and read some pdf's but it remains something I have yet to be as confident in using as I am my EXS set up. I need a little inspiration here!

    My questions are directed to former users of EXS with Sample Merge who now use Vienna Instruments.

    Are you happier working with Vienna Instruments over your previous EXS/Samplemerge set up?

    What are the clear advantages and/ or drawbacks?

    Does the key-switching work as elegantly as it does in Logic's EXS?

    Can you instanciate as large an orchestra (ie as many instruments in one session)?

    Any feedback appreciated.
  • J
    J
    Patrick,

    I originally purchased the EXS version and now I also have the VI version. I own and use the EXSManager on a regular basis but haven’t used the Sample Merge function per se.

    1. Yes, it’s much better and faster in almost every area.
    2. a. Advantages- your workflow will speed up instantly, you can get an entire instrument or section on one MIDI track, switching between multiple articulations is extremely easy and fast, MIDI controller data handling is a lot better than on EXS, the old Performance Tools are dead and have been resurrected in a much more convenient form.
    b. Drawbacks – the samples are encoded with metadata and you can’t access them directly to edit them.
    3. It leaves EXS keyswitching in the dust.
    4. You don’t need as many instances of VI as you did EXS, by far. Twenty or so instances can accommodate a large orchestra. Your Arrange page will look a lot more organized. (There is a great article in Virtual Instruments magazine about using standalone VI's in conjuction with those inside of Logic to go beyond the 3.something GB of RAM that Logic can use currently, if you need more instances.)
    5. Don’t sweat the learning curve, it’s pretty easy. Learning the Performance page will be key to how realistic your instruments sound. One of the advantages of having purchased the EXS version first is that you can still keep them on your system and use it in conjunction with the VI’s. A single EXS instance is easier on your computer resources than a single instance of the VI so if you’re want to use an individual articulation for an instrument pulling up an EXS will be more economical.

    You’re gonna dig it.

    Best regards,
    Jack
  • J
    J
    I must echo Jack's assessment.

    To add, some EXS users have not gone to the Cube because of either the expense and/or because the way they have the earlier editions set up is working quite well for them.

    The workflow issue alone is a time saver, but I'm always aware that the Cube volumes are 24-bit. It is a noticeable improvement in the sound quality.

    I'm SO happy not to need 20 tracks for violins alone-- and the keyswitching is not the only plus with instant access to other articulations. The ability to assign velocity ranges with different articulations within those ranges that automatically switch patches according to how you play is really brilliant (and user editable).

    It's just so much easier to use all around.
  • P
    P
    Not a thing here I can disagree with. Just three more stray thoughts.

    1. VI adds the ability to use speed as a controller. By definition, it is the least intrusive of all MIDI commands.

    2. I salute you for building an EXS template. For the record, you don't NEED VI to make a great orchestra. But EXS and VI are profoundly complimentary. None of your EXS work will be lost, or even minimized.

    One proverb says: "It is good to inherit a library, but it is better to build one." And this is true of building an EXS template. We gain an intimate knowledge of what sounds like what, and where it is. That work is happily never lost. VI is added, but our hands-on knowledge of VSL EXS sounds never leaves. In a computer world of inevitable obsolescence, this is a welcome exception.

    I can easily see myself using my EXS template for many years -- perhaps secreted away in a Mac mini -- always there, always sounding great.

    3. One EXS benefit still edges out VI. The mod matrix allows for the manipulation of sample selection, filtering, etc. through *multiple* sources. And the "via" command allows us to modulate "via" a modulation. We can, for example, affect the sample selection of a patch with the mod wheel RELATIVE to how hard we hit the key (dest: sample select / source: ctrl 1 / via: velocity).

    That's a whole lot of control. It's also why my core violin patch remains in EXS, even though I have the exact same sound (VL-14_mV_sus) in VI.
  • J
    J
    In most cases the VI's are a great stride forward. There are two distinct drawbacks concerning ease of use in Logic: The VI window isn't really integrated within the host so use is not intuitive and slows down workflow somewhat (Loss of key commands, plug-in window disappears when moving between screensets, etc) but hopefully this will be addressed. The second drawback is not being able to extend the keyspan of samples beyond the preset - even at the expense of authenticity - for when you either want to complete a melody or line that is out of the normal range or for sound design purposes.

    These issues excepted I gve VI a big thumbs up!

    Juian
  • M
    M
    In my experience, there is NO comparison.

    EXS was a sample player that could cope with the VSL library... it was great in it's time - I changed to Logic from Cubase rather than go the PC/Giga route, or use Kontact (less efficient at the time) - respect to EXS in it's day...

    However for VSL NOTHING beats the Vienna Instrument. It's another world apart from having to manually adjust your repetitions, and the way you can just drag and drop articulations is something you don't fully appreciate until you've used it a little bit - even the videos (which I encourage you to check out if you haven't done so already) don't show fully how much fun this instrument is to use. If you've got a good idea, and a reasonably fast computer, it's so efficient and quick (relatively speaking to the complexity of the preset/matrix) you have a short load time from you hard drive but apart from that, you can preview sounds so well - for example, load a legato violin, then you want to see how the viola soudns on the same section, you try it, prefer the violin, when you load the violin back again, it's basically already remember in memory, so takes just a couple of seconds (instead of 10). The Pro Ed required a lot of patience, a steep learning curve for many, and ultimately the results could usually not come close to the VI product that is easy to impliment, fast to set up, efficient and much more flexible. There are just so many features simple yet ingenius - doesn't compare to EXS.

    Another way of putting it, I would give the VSL Pro Ed +EXS combo a 4 out of 10 for usability, only because VSL sounds so great etc etc, but I would give the Vienna Instrument a 10 out of 10 by comparison.

    Another way of putting it yet again, a project that might take me all day in Pro Ed with manual tweaking of repetitions and the like would by comparison only take me an hour in VI, it's THAT fast and efficient, and this easy of use really helps towards preserving your inspiration, it lets things flow more and you don't get stuck in technical things not even half the time, practically not at all, at least that is what I've found. The worst you have to do, which is actually one of the best features, is to optimise RAM - but if you use Cubase as I just found out you don't need to do that if you freeze the track - you can unload the instrument which free's up the RAM AND the cpu... very cool. If you use logic, the freeze function presently keeps the samples in ram, so when using Logic I optimise and then freeze but it's painless enough, and best of all you can just keep on loading instruments.

    So, for Pro Ed, I could load say for example 20 articulations including a couple of legato patches, and that was it (unless I bounced to audio which I didn't usually have the patience for!) but with VI and the optimise feature + freezing I can load 10 times that amount on the same machine with the same RAM and cpu.

    Hope that helps. yes this is a glowing review but deservedly so, you can't compare EXS and VI. Don't forget also VI is the native bitrate of the library - 24bit, and yes, over a mix IMO you absolutely hear a HUGE difference between the 16bit and 24bit. For me I relegated my Pro Ed library to a backup drive that isn't even plugged in anymore, I just don't need it. VI has all the samples of the Pro Ed plus many more in a format hugely more easy to access and use and enjoy.

    EDIT: Oh yes the accessing of the editor is an issue as described in the above post - however consider the technical limiations of host software - as I understand it this was the best way to integrate a an instrument that would be able to use it's own sample "server" as the VI does, so it was a compromise, however considering the other time "savers" I would say this saves you 8 hours in the day and loses you 20 minutes - overall, a big save!

    Miklos.
  • P
    P
    Thanks to you all for the feedback. I really appreciate it. It all seems encouraging which is good. Interestingly no real negatives.

    One other question:

    I still use Protools as a front end using DTDM (ESB). Are there any really nasty conflicts with VI on ESB instrument tracks? One problem I had with EW choir was that their much vaunted 'word builder' feature needed multiple midi channels which simply never worked on my set up.

    Jack: I think it is a bit of a shame that the samples are encoded as metadata because one way I have found useful and quick to work is this - I want to search a particular cymbal hit (for example) to insert in a recording. I simply go to the import audio page and audition the samples directly. There are a massive number of samples that I would never have found searching through presets. Having auditioned ones I like I then simply import them as audio files into my arrangement. Voila! I would have liked to still have this option but in 24 bit.

    JWL and Ploughman :You both make the point that EXS library is by no means reduntant. Im fairly sure I'll be using a combination of VI and EXS which in turn, makes me wonder whether I may be best off initially, spending my hard earned cash on the new samples (Power Trumpets/Appassionata etc) rather than doubling up the ones that I already have. Probably I should replace some of the Pro Edition instruments that are really going to sound noticeably better in 24 bit initially and where the VI performance is really going to notice. Any ones particularly stand out as sounding dramatically better? Maybe the Brass and Strings?
    Looking at the 'Discount Calculator' It appears there would be little financial incentive to buy the entire Cube rather than individual VI's. Anyway I have already bought the Orchestral Strings 1 so maybe I have inadvertantly lost that opportunity.

    Julian and mpower88: I take your points about the VI window. Maybe I have an old version but whenever I open VI get a white pop-up window saying: "Vienna Instruments AudioUnit-Server Interface...Show Window" which strikes me as a mildly annoying bug.

    I guess everything is bound to sound better in 24 bit...

    Right..I obviously need to spend some time watching the videos etc. Thanks for the encouragement. I guess that's what I need. I'll keep an eye here for further comments.
  • M
    M
    Patrick: yes re the window this is correct that is how it displays. however VSl have covered this issue in another thread - there was no other way to get the window to open directly from the instrument track since it is in fact another app that you are running which runs off the VSL server, this is really a limitation of VST / AU instrument interface and not a fault of not trying on part of the VSL team - at least that is my understanding of it from what I remember reading. In other words, we can expect this feature to probably be fixed as soon as it is technically possible.

    But like I said, when you weigh up the time savers against this issue, it's a non-issue.

    If you want to open EXS, it's two clicks, versus 3 with VI, but in Cubase, (where you don't need EXS anymore anyway - so Cubase is again a viable option) it's only two - one to open that pop up window and two to open the VI editor, so, no different than with VI. Cubase also has the added benefit of "unloading" samples when you freeze a track, which I find reallly useful, it means you can load a lot more instruments. In Logic freezing doesn't unload RAM and so you still have a ceiling, I would imagine, in Cubase the ceiling is only limited by tracks and general host issues but not the VSL itself (providing you only unfreeze a certain amount of tracks at a given time - which is quite workable).

    Miklos.
  • J
    J
    For me, it depends on what I'm doing -- what the project is, and what the instrument is. For the most part, I absolutely prefer the VIs to the old EXS approach -- so much more flexible. No comparison, really. However, I do have EXS versions of many instruments still, and use them quite regularly. If I had the Cube, and the horsepower to run it, I doubt I'd ever launch an EXS instance, though.

    2 cents only.

    J.
  • P
    P
    Unless you are a man of infinite resources, I would consider the use of both EXS and VI inevitable as you transistion.

    24 bit improves everything. All VI's sound better. But, in the spirit of your question, I've noticed that the brass in particular gain a depth and smoothness. When I heard the VI Brass I, I noticed that I could again use the trombone in that "horn-like" round tone for pp to mp harmonic material in the C3 to (middle) C4 range.

    In fact, before answering this question, I returned to compare, and I realized that I had actually removed the VSL EXS solo brass from my hard drive. I came to consider it so inferior to VI, I decided it wasn't worth the space.

    Miklos is right about the repetition modes. I'd forgotten how bad they were (mainly because I never used them). All of my short notes in EXS have been round-robin-ed, but that still limits the EXS user to only a pair of alternating samples. So instead of one machine gun, it sounds like two. VI's usually alternate with no fewer than four variations.

    Another thought: do you use a lot of slow to fast legato lines? The cross from slow to fast legato in VI using the speed control is just wonderful, and nothing close to it exists in EXS.
  • M
    M
    The only value in EXS in regards to performance is the fact that when the VI aka the VSL server is full on memory, you can start loading up EXS, which uses Logic's memory address, so in effect you can load more samples into EXS where your VI is full (or visa versa for that matter). However, I've never had to do this, and at the end of the day yes, it's a pretty good workaround in terms of really getting the most out of your machine - but my machine's CPU isn't fast enough to run all the optimised and freezed tracks that VI can deliver ALONE let alone thinking about starting up EXS. I always max out the cpu before the RAM this is a dual 2.0ghz G5, and I'm talking about 40 stereo 32bit freeze tracks of VI and a couple of altiverbs at low buffer settings. Leopard is coming in the next few months, so we are told, and that will be fully 64 bit. Give it 6 months to transition, by Christmas time, I'd say this memory ceiling thing will be history and we will be able to load 16Gigs of optimised (and that means 200+ tracks) of VI into a Mac Pro 8 core machine. It's not as far away as it sounds. In the mean time, only a Quad G5 or Mac Pro will max out the RAM using just VI, as it is just so efficient (if you take the time to optimise).

    A quick tip by the way maybe everybody already knows this, but in logic if you want to optimise in VI, just click "Learn", then freeze the track, - the learn mode still works! - unfreeze the track, click "optimise" and you're done. Much quicker than waiting for the VI to "learn" in realtime. Never failed for me. An example - a 80 Mb string legato patch will be reduced to 2mb of RAM usage! However it is worth noting that each instance does use some RAM just for being there so you still should work to keep your instances down by using keyswitching to change patches of the same instrument rather than opening new instances for new patches of the same instrument (where possible). But all of this combined means you can load a vastly larger orchestration than you EVER could with EXS (unless you printed to audio, and unloaded the instrument - which you don't need to do with VI).

    Miklos.
  • J
    J
    last edited
    last edited

    @Patrick Wilson said:



    Julian and mpower88: I take your points about the VI window. Maybe I have an old version but whenever I open VI get a white pop-up window saying: "Vienna Instruments AudioUnit-Server Interface...Show Window" which strikes me as a mildly annoying bug.



    Hi Patrick,

    I respect of the operation of the VI interface within Logic:

    The main issue I find is not that it takes 3 clicks to open the plug-in it is more that when the VI window is fronted Logic becomes a background app. The most infuriating issue is for example you make an edit in the plug-in window then to listen you want to run the transport in Logic (i.e. start playback) so you hit your key command for play... and nothing happens... then you remember you have to switch back into Logic.

    If you are working exclusively with VI it becomes more of an automatic process but where you are using a number of plug-ins that work within Logic one way the VI interface can catch you out.

    This anomaly excepted, the VI intefrace offers some fantastic opportunties to aid sampling composition and design.

    One thing to perhaps consider if you archive your projects and need access to them at a later date on perhaps a future operating system (Leopard or 64 bit) may be to save your VI instances. Logic will save your current data within the plug-ins as part of the song but with operating system changes this could be un-predictable for external plug-ins when OS's change. For example there was a problem with Spectrasonics Atmosphere Plug-in when it transferred from VST (in Mac OS9) to an AU in (OSX) Logic had saved the plug-in details for the Atmosphere VST in OS9 but once the OS changed this plug was no longer avalable! There was eventually a work round but worth taking note of.

    Julian
  • M
    M
    Julian makes valid points: I point out though that the interface issue is a technical limitation of the host not VI, that said, it can indeed be a bit frustrating but still, your original question was in regards to a comparison of EXS and VI and in that, there remains NO comparison (in my opinion), the fact is these *two* issues aside, the amount of time it saves you and the grace with which it does do it's appointed tasks, and the improvement in sound quality, and the fact you save time and can load a lot more articulations than you ever could with EXS all add up to make those two interface issues non issues, for me at least. It's easy enough to realise that logic is a background app after a few times. VI is in fact it's own app separate from Logic, and they had to do that to get it to run the way they needed it to. Future releases will no doubt see and end to this limitation (of course we hope so). However, if you use Expose, the mac osx window organising system it's easy enough to put your mouse in the top left corner or press F9 to jump back to the VI window you just had open if you switched back to Logic. You CAN also play parts from within the VI window, that does work, you just cannot hit "play" because you are technically not in Logic. You simply click the Logic window behind, hit space bar. Providing you don't open another VI window the one you were just working in goes into the background and can be access via expose's f9 key. It's a minor annoyance, not the fault of VSL, that really doesn't count as a negative in comparison to the major and significant improvements VI has over EXS, once again IMO.

    Miklos.
  • J
    J
    last edited
    last edited

    @mpower88 said:

    However, if you use Expose, the mac osx window organising system it's easy enough to put your mouse in the top left corner or press F9 to jump back to the VI window you just had open if you switched back to Logic.
    Miklos.


    Hi Miklos,

    When I am working with the VI's and logic screensets I always "loose" my open VI.

    Example: I'm on screenset 1 in Logic - in my set-up - arrange window + transport on screen 1, enviroment and audio window + video (if applicable) on screen 2. I'm editing the VI and switching between Logic and VI. Now I want a quick peek at the score so I hit screenset 2 - my score layout windows. Have a look then hit screenset 1 to return to the arrange page. Unfortunately the open VI has closed itself so to restore you have to open the plug-in again.

    do you know a work round that will stop the VI window closing when you move between screensets and back again?

    thanks

    Julian
  • M
    M
    No unfortunately I don't - I think the window only stays open when you just click back and forward without changing screen sets.

    It's a compromise you live with and of course everyone is hoping and waiting for this to eventually be resolved. The main point is that this is a host limitation, to which the VSL team could not presently find a work around better than what we have, because it is simply technically not possible, and this was the best compromise. However, considering it's pretty much a one of a kind first and best in it's class instrument (by far), again, it's a set back that is for me at least, a non-issue especially when you compare it with using EXS and all the glaring drawbacks of that system when used with a huge sample library for example. I have every confidence that as soon as this can be resolved it will be. We have to remember that the VSL team are users of VI as well! and I'm sure they'd just like all of us want to have it as efficient streamlined and reliable as any of the other users, so as soon as it can be done, I'm sure it will be.

    I didn't mention before also VI has it's on on the fly sample compression for the 24bit files which means you don't really lose out on disk space or RAM for the extra bit depth (as far as I understand it anyway, though I'm not a technical experct on the inner workings of VI).

    Miklos.
  • J
    J
    Julian & Miklos,

    This may not solve all the issues but since I use a MIDI controller (in my case a Mackie Control Universal) when I'm using the VI I can still use the transport controller section without having to go back and click on Logic to access it for transport purposes.

    It doesn't help when I need to go back to access the Arrrange, Matrix or other windows per se. But I does help immeasurably since I'm usually going back and forth between the VI and the transport functions.

    Now paying a wad for a Mackie might be overkill but if this method fits in with your workflow habits you should check this out, it's less than $199:

    http://www.presonus.com/faderport.html
  • JT3_JonJ
    JT3_JonJ
    last edited
    last edited

    @mpower88 said:

    The worst you have to do, which is actually one of the best features, is to optimise RAM - but if you use Cubase as I just found out you don't need to do that if you freeze the track - you can unload the instrument which free's up the RAM AND the cpu... very cool. If you use logic, the freeze function presently keeps the samples in ram, so when using Logic I optimise and then freeze but it's painless enough, and best of all you can just keep on loading instruments.


    Just wanted to point out that if you turn the "instrument channel" to "off," Logic no longer keeps its samples in RAM. When you want to write with that instrument again, simply put it back on the correct channel and all your instruments will autoload (Note: I do not own VI, so I dont know if it works the same way, but every other plugin I've tried, Kontakt, atmosphere, EXS, does indeed work as expected).

    Hope you find this information useful. I did, and frankly dont know how I got along without it!
  • JT3_JonJ
    JT3_JonJ
    I've been reading through your posts with great interest as I'm currently considering upgrading my OPUS EXS to Vienna Special Edition, and though the new content is great, I am not 100% sold on upgrading (mainly because I'm a student and money is an issue) unless the VI player will dramatically improve my work flow.

    Most of the "advantages" seem to stem from the ability to switch numerous articulations more easily. Will this advantage translate to Special Edition, given the fact that most instruments only have 4 articulations; sus, stac, Sforzato, and legato? My template currently use midi channel splitters to easily switch between articulations on a single track, so I already have my violins on one track, violas on one track, etc. So is the ability to load all my flute patches into on VI any different than what I'm currently doing? BTW, can you load, for example, flute and piccolo patches in the same VI for scoring parts that double?

    Thank you in advance for your help and reply! As a student with an EXTREMELY tight budget, Its very difficult/frustrating not knowing if something is worth the money, especially when you are not allow to try it/return. Thus I truly appreciate user feedback! THANK YOU
    -Jon
  • PaulP
    VSL Team
    PaulP
    last edited
    last edited
    Hi Jon,

    yes, layering and stacking is no problem in the VI (up to 3 patches in 1 cell, and you can "Cell Xfade" between the first two cells).

    Please have a look at our Video Tutorials, the video is called "tacking and Layering Patches" [:)]

    Best, Paul
    Paul Kopf Head of Product Marketing, Social Media and Support
  • JT3_JonJ
    JT3_JonJ
    Yeah, I saw that video a while ago, but didnt make the connection that you could layer different instruments into the same VI player (Piccolo & Flute). I guess you wouldn't really do this very often, as EQ and rev settings would effect BOTH instruments. There is no "multi channel" VI, correct?