Welcome Fernando,

1. We didn't reduce the dynamic layers.
To keep the sample amount low, we decided to map mainly whole tone scales.
That also enables you to load more articulations into one engine.
But we didn't want to reduce the expression possibilities of the instruments.
Therefore no velocity layer reduction.

2. The corresponding bass instruments for clarinet, bassoon, trombone and tuba, do have a reduced range. Only mapped below the natural range of the main instruments.

3. The harp patch is identical. It seems that there is a mistake in one of the lists. We'll correct it.

best wishes
Herb

@Another User said:

To keep the sample amount low, we decided to map mainly whole tone scales. That also enables you to load more articulations into one engine.

I compared the leg flute and noticed that the Opus 1 version has more samples the than Performance Set . Is this a mistake?

---------------
Alex Cremers

No mistake.

First Edition, does have four different performance legato patches:
piano performance-legato,
and piano, mezzoforte, and forte "performance legato-grace" files.
All in all 1852 samples

Opus 1 is labeled with piano and forte performance legato.
933 samples.

ok Herb,
Thanks for the responses. : )
Regards.

I agree with Fernando... finally MY chance to get into this beautiful piece of making music... [[[:)]]]
Great! Now this aweful time of waiting for xmas [[[:)]]]

cheers Angel

BTW: Hi @ all... i'm new [[[:)]]]

@Angel said:

[...] BTW: Hi @ all... i'm new [:)]

Cool! Heavenly encouragement! :-]

... welcome, Angel.

/Dietz - Vienna Symphonic Library

You mean the "Grace" performance instruments aren't grace notes? I just checked out the performance Grace Flute and it seemed as though I could use it like a normal legato instrument. is this true?

Evan Evans

SIDE NOTE: There wasn't a p+mf+f Flute for the Performance Grace. So I copied the mf into the p+f. That seemed to work after I adjusted all the velocity layer splits. Was this right? Did you guys forget a p+mf+f instrument? Also it looks like the same mistake fo rthe Bassoon?

Yes, Evan - it's true!!!

It seems that you are missing a lot of the potential of the First Edition.

Regarding combinations:
I only wanted to list, that there is
a piano,
a mezzoforte and
a forte version.

There is no combined p+mf+f instrument because at that time (when the First Edition for EXS was designed) it was only possible to combine 32 dimensions.
That means, only 2 dynamic layers of a performance legato instrument could be combined when we mapped the First edition.

best wishes
Herb

@Another User said:

There is no combined p+mf+f instrument because at that time (when the First Edition for EXS was designed) it was only possible to combine 32 dimensions.

Yes, I noticed that when I pasted in the MF samples there were like around 40 layers, but visually I could still only see 32. Is that because EXS was fixed to allow for more than 32 dynamic layers but you can only "see" 32?

Evan Evans

Generally there is no rule, how and when you use the performance-legato grace instruments instead of the normal performance legatos.

Looking at the "history" of these instruments, they should work better for faster movements. (and they work very well for fast passages).

On the other hand, why not use them also for slower movements. Simply trust your ears or your imagination.

I would say, there can't be enough variations and options to choose from.
Simple example: I worked on a piece where short identical legato movements were repeated very often. Here it was a really helpful to alternate between two different legato versions to get a random effect.

Regarding visible dimensions:
I think that's the problem.
Absurd that the engine could handle more than 32 dimensions, but you can't see or edit them, isn't it?

But I'm not the EXS guru here.
You know, I'm the old fashioned giga guy.
I only have this infos from our EXS team, and I don't know, if I'm really up to date.

But if I understand you right, this limitation is still existing.
Hm, a solution to see and handle more dimensions (just for mapping issues) would be much appreciated...

best wishes
Herb

HERB,

I just listened to your demo "Fast Repetitions". I noticed that there is no way on earth any of us using the EXS Rep Tool could get such a performance (or at least, not within a week of straight programming). It then occured to me that you must have done this with the GigaStudio PC Repetition Tool. I think you need to spend a moment and check out the Repetition Tool for EXS. I don't think it's working like the PC Tool. As far as I know just about everyone who used the EXS Rep Tool has found it unuseable.

Are you sure the EXS Rep Tool is working properly? I will believe you if you tell me so.

I have fiddled with every parameter and used different key-command notes, but I cannot get it to sound decent.

Evan Evans

Evan, for the fast repetitions you don't use any tool.
Tool is required, when the labelname includes "Perf".

These fast repetitions are really easy to play, and if you use the release sample versions, you could use them straight out of the box.

The advantage of the fast repetitions is, that you don't have to perform each individual repetition note. The disadvantage, you can't alter the tempo, therefore you have different BPM versions.

We designed these instruments this way, because it's too difficult to perform very fast repetitions on a keyboard. But this is not a tool problem, it's a keyboard problem. Such things are much easier performing on a brass or string instrument.

The fast repetition demo in our demosection was done in 20 minutes.

best wishes
Herb

@Another User said:

Yes, Evan - it's true!!!

It seems that you are missing a lot of the potential of the First Edition.

AHA! I've been missing that too - I didn't check out these "grace" instruments because I assumed they were, well, y'know, er, "grace-notes", like it says in the Performance Set Manual!
Why are they called this?
Anyway it's good to know about them now!