I don't think that's a good example, because the Special Edition organ offers only Mixtures (combinations of several Ranks)
So it's not possible to tune them individually in an editor.
That's simply how the original Organ sounds.

Generally we sligthly corrected the tuning of the individual Ranks (exclusively available in the Konzerthaus-Organ Edition), but also not too excessive, to keep an authentic organ sound. A too precise tuning would cause an sythetic feeling.
However the sampled organ is more in tune than the original instrument.

best
Herb

It would be useful to extend the range of some samples. Some film composers like to use "extreme techniques" for drama. Perhaps this could be built into the plug-in.

I'd greatly appreciate the possibility to implement historical tunings -- be it with a sample editor or not. It's so easy in Kontakt...

VI is essentially a software sample-playback app (albeit a very ingenious one) - and not that different in principle to apps like Halion or Kontakt - both of which offer extensive editing at sample level - so these editing features must be achievable within VI.

VSL is justifiably one of the most expensive libs in the world.

Having the tools to tweak your investment to YOUR tastes and needs would be enormously attractive to potential buyers who might otherwise settle for Kontakt-based libs [[;)]]

@herb said:

A too precise tuning would cause an sythetic feeling.

Having been a church organist for many years, I agree entirely that real organs do tend to be ever so slightly out of tune here and there, which is why I moderated my comments about the high notes of the mixtures. I guess the simple workaround for pieces that use C5 a lot is to transpose the midi input up a semitone, and the organ output down a semitone so that the offending note becomes a C# instead.

Anyway, if the full organ VI is more in tune then that's another good reason why I should buy it...

Actually...I fall on the other side of this.

When I buy an instrument--virtual or not, I want ti to play correctly out of the box. If you want to tweak out individual samples, just buy a sampler. I don't think VSL's samples are that amazing--I think the programming of the VI is. Don't get me wrong--world class samples....but, there are plenty of world class samples. Some of them a whole lot cheaper.

Anyway...I HATED my years with Gigastudio for that very reason--every time I bought a library, I felt like I needed to tweak this or that.

Now...I do hear flaws. Those notes that "jump out"....I think it must have to do with some randomization going on--it's never something I can easily reproduce, but I think that rather than have VSL work on an editor, I'd prefer we make a sticky (or forum of it's own) for "bug spotting". Like, "In the Chamber VI_blahblah patch some C#3 variation doesn't dynamically match well" Or, mentioned above "The upper octave of Organ#5 gets flat"--or whatever. I would think they would gladly fix these things for everyone. They're obviously oversights or design--maybe that top octave of those old organs really is out of tune. [;)] Either way...they can address it with some sort of instrument specific patch or something.

I'd rather see that than the offer up an editor. You can buy their Giga libs now pretty cheaply--and open them in whatever sampler and tweak until your ears are blue. I'd rather the community work together to help them better their instrument design than hole away in our own little labs cooking up our own customized versions.

popmann I'm with you on that one 100%. I think if there are minor issues that people want fixed it's far better to do it on a forum so that everyone can benefit from the experience and improvements via updates - seems to be the most appropriate avenue for such things and I think VSL would appreciate that kind of feedback that lets them improve their libraries even further.

I also think the idea of completely ruining the perfect simplicity, the "ideal" VI interface and usability is even more nightmarish than finding out that you have to edit your autoexec.bat and win.ini files on your Mac computer. it's a dream you assume is not real and you will wake up from... otherwise you will have to run screaming! I love what VSL has done for simplicity and work flow, agian, second to none. To introduce an editor for the simple reasons outlined in my personal opinion is archaic and benile.... sorry, that's what I think, and stupid frankly, but I"m not saying the posters are stupid, just the idea (big difference) [;)] anyway I just disagree with that idea very much and I think those small issues can be 90% address via a forum, and as for range extensions... ah, I don't agree with that, I think the instrument should be represented as it is, so we're on the same playing field and know where we stand, again that's just me I know others have their reasons and arguments for doing things otherwise. As for the organ, I don't think it should be tuned "up" it sounds absolutely ball breakingly fantastic in fact it's my absolute favourite instrument in the whole library and of any library - it's so COOL to play. amazing I love it don't change a thing VSL because you nailed that one perfect.

Miklos.

I actually did report some of my personal dislikes.

Herb was kind enough to respond, with a fairly detailed explanation of why he disagreed with my observations [:O]ops:

Fair enough.

But that's the crux of the matter: I'm still stuck with the things that bug me.

There is no gaurantee that the things that are important to us individually will be fixed by the VSL team. It would only happen if they thought it necessary & correct.

Hence the need for a personal editor.

Popmann:
I hear where you're coming from. However, the inclusion of an editor would not reduce the VI to a "Gigastudio nightmare" - I wouldn't want that either. Many would never touch it. But to those who needed it, it would be a godsend.

Thanks for the responses.
Mike.

Well, in that I would liken it to people wanting to dissect the Mac OS or run OSX on a PC.... it defeats the whole point of it.... [*-)] I'd rather have them spending their time building more libraries, expanding on existing ones, and generally doing exactly what they are already doing a lot of - it's good! I love imperfections in the library, they are perfect. As for technical issues, they always seem more than ready to correct legitimate technical errors, we just need to post them if we find them and I've seen on the forum for some time, they are very forthcoming, honest and deliberate in getting updates to customers fast.

Don't get me wrong, I respect your opinion and wishes and I'm sure you have your reasons but again let me give you another analogy, yes, a car analogy, I don't care if people don't like them but I don't want to tweak the onboard computer in my ferrari (if I had one) nor do I want to replace the rims with custom alloys, or put a spoiler on it.... I wan it just as it is. Man I wish I had a Ferrari, a brand new one, fresh from the factory....... [:D] I trust the wisdom and heart that the makers have put into their creation and it is exactly why I want to buy one, and not a suped up Nissan.

Now I will hide in my bomb shelter while I get pelted with rocks and other debris from that car analogy in a music forum... come on people - Ferrari and VSL - we're talking high art here!!! There IS a parallel!!!

Miklos. [:D]

Hi all, thanks for your thoughts. For me, the programming question goes beyond what is merely 'correct'. Being able to tweak an instrument in a sampler opens up creative avenues which are lost (or made very difficult) if you take away editing facilities. On sessions, producers often ask me to extend the range of an instrument - when I explain that you can't do that inside the Vienna Instrument they are astonished.

>I'd rather the community work together to help them better their instrument design than hole away in our own little labs cooking up our own customized versions.

What's wrong with customized versions? One man's meat, etc. The two approaches aren't incompatible.

>To introduce an editor for the simple reasons outlined in my personal opinion is archaic and benile....

Seeing as programmable instruments and samplers haven't ceased to exist, 'archaic' seems too strong a word.

Another vote for the editor.

Sorry guys that's a definite thumbs down from me and I'm afraid, also a "Boo" and a jeer also... The thought of the VSL team spending time on that instead of other projects - ones that inspire them and bring new and more varied instruments into the world, and expanding on already amazing collections.... pure madness I tell you! If you want an editor go and speak to east west or Emu... While I understand your reasons and with respect to your opinions I just honestly feel like you might as well go an tinker with your Rolls Royce gear box as far as I'm concerned, good luck to you but personally I think it's a mad thing to do!

Miklos. [8-)]

But Miklos, creativity is a kind of madness! I'm off to tinker with my Rolls Royce gear box, I'm sure it used to sound better in the bottom register.

OK, so an internal editor isn't going to happen -- but please please do implement historical tunings in a forthcoming version!

Or another way of suggesting the order of things would be to say that creativity stirs madness from the dusty depths from where no channel noticed or inspired it before, but it is not the source of creativity nor the product, it is a byproduct to say it was liberated into awareness and what comes after would be a madness free creation? Or perhaps again, true creativity appears as madness to a mind that has never seen it before. I read that mountain people who had never seen a photograph before were unable to recognise a human being in a 2d image / photograph - they had to learn it. I guess you just know when you know, you know? [:)]

One thing though, don't tinker with a rolls royce gear box.... [[:|]]

Miklos.

[:D]

I for one would rather have VSL improve what's already out than spend more time developing totally new stuff.

I still think that it's absolutely impractical to have different ranges on different strings or horns patches, for example.

With a simplified editor, at least the user would be able to "fix" that by themselves, without waiting for VSL to release an update. In the long term, everybody benefits.

Surely VSL is already using some kind of in-house editor, so it's not like it's something impossible to do. It just needs to be limited to some basic functions, instrument range definitely being one of them.

AFAIK this view is shared by *many* VI users out here.

Jerome

I'm sorry, we can't fulfill any requests regarding an editor.

It's impossible to use the inhouse editor for the finalized crypted database.
Furthermore the inhouse editor is related on scripts and nobody could use it without a really heavy learning curve.

At last it's not possible to extend instrument ranges (with or without editor), because of the core design of the streaming engine.

best
Herb

Thanks for clarifying that Herb.

Hi Herb,

There has been a lot of forum traffic on the subject of extending ranges, both for sound design purposes and when some users haven't felt the range reflects their own experience of working with real nstruments.

Given your comment that the core design of the streaming engine does not permit the extending of sample ranges there is another possible solution. Transpose the samples at the extreme ends of the instrument ranges, write new extended keyrange programmes incorporating these samples then these would work within the capabilities of the streaming engine.

This could be applied as a downloadable update for the library, perhaps users would pay for the increased flexibility.

As a purely virtual representation of orchestral instruments VSL is in a class of it's own but I do believe there should be recognition of the benefit of features that were present in previous incarnations of the VSL sample set.

Kind regards

Julian

@herb said:

I'm sorry, we can't fulfill any requests regarding an editor.

It's impossible to use the inhouse editor for the finalized crypted database.
Furthermore the inhouse editor is related on scripts and nobody could use it without a really heavy learning curve.

At last it's not possible to extend instrument ranges (with or without editor), because of the core design of the streaming engine.

best
Herb