David,

I read your question and at first thought not to answer it because this library really is too vast to really explain in words without a long winded explanation that would still be in adequete.. Quite simply the products are complimentary of each other. If you have to choose one, I would get the demo cube. It can far out explain the differences (though it's only a glimpse) more than words. If you know a store or a composer in your area with VSL it would be most useful.

Hmm well think of it this way:

Orchestral Cube: multisampling as we know it. Tons of articulations and special p<f>p, p<f, sfz etc samples. The technique used in de the Cube is not new, we've seen it in other Giga libraries as well, but of course the choice of material and the recordings themselves are amazing.

Performance Set: now the contents of this set you won't find in any other library out yet. The set offers you new playing techniques in combination with a midi tool set between the midi input and the sampler. This is used for true legato playing, true repetitions, alternation and that sort of things. True legato is really my favourite as you're able to play realtime on the keyboard, legato, and will hear the actual interval switching the way it sounds with real instruments (glisses, clicks, breaths, valves).

So the Cube is a complete orchestral library, but without the Performance Set you won't be able to achieve the realistic legato prhasing and repetitions you're hearing in some of the demos.

The Performance Set is not a complete orchestral library. It is a tool GREATLY enhancing the realism and writing freedom of an existing library. Combining the Set with the Cube is of course what you ultimately want, as they totally blend in sound. The Set does not offer standard samples, like single percussion hits, single staccatos, as that is what the Cube is for.

If you already own orchestral libraries, perhaps going for the Set first is a good idea as you will probably gain the most in realistic sequencing. But you will soon find you want the Cube as well.

Hope this helps.

Maarten

Thanks for your replies Craig and Maarten. My understanding now is that
the Cube is a very complete set of samples, and that Performance is
tools (plus some samples) that will make it easier to set up velocity
based sample switching (and other things). That in itself could save a
great deal of time.

thank you again,

David Reiser

@dsr said:

Thanks for your replies Craig and Maarten. My understanding now is that
the Cube is a very complete set of samples, and that Performance is
tools (plus some samples) that will make it easier to set up velocity
based sample switching (and other things). That in itself could save a
great deal of time.

David:

"some samples" would be selling the performance set short a lot, there's 7 DVDs worth of samples on there.

Exactly Jean!

The Performance Set has been VERY extensively sampled.
But with the goal to create a strong set of four or five expressive tools, not an "allround set".

Maarten

@Another User said:

Thanks for your replies Craig and Maarten. My understanding now is that
the Cube is a very complete set of samples, and that Performance is
tools (plus some samples) that will make it easier to set up velocity
based sample switching (and other things). That in itself could save a
great deal of time.

thank you again,

David Reiser

I'm not sure this is the way to look at the performance set. It is not a velocity based package. It is a set of natural sounding instruments with limited articulations (the articulations are covered extremely well in the cube along with many velocity type instruments).

I always have trouble with the terms of the cube being described as a standard type library. I think there are so many real performances in the cube, of notes being played in a particular way, that I tend to think of it as a performance library also. Yes it's more traditional from a tool approach but the amount of performances in the cube is vast.

The Orchestral Cube is a complete orchestra (minus piccolo). You can write orchestral pieces with it; it can stand alone.

The Performance Set would be useful on its own, but it's not an orchestra or even a complete set of samples for any one of its instruments. It has no percussion, in fact it doesn't even have short bow strings at this point! Instead it adds specialized elements: runs, legato performances, grace note winds, and repetition performances - which amounts to way more than that sounds like! So the Performance Set seems intended mostly as a supplement/upgrade to the Cube, even though it's pretty huge and deep on its own.

If you're going to start with one, you definitely start with the Cube and add the Performance Set later. If you can't start with the whole Cube at first, you start with its individual libraries: strings, winds & brass, percussion.

In my opinion.

David:

This link shows what's in both sets:
http://www.truespec.com/store/samplelibraries/ilio/articulations.shtml

This review gives a more detailed overview:
http://www.truespec.com/quikstart/reviews/samplelibraries/vienna/vienna051903.shtml

Peter Alexander

Thank you all for your replies, and thanks to you, I am finally getting a feel for what these libraries are about. The Cube sounds massive in scope, and the Performance Set seems like one of those rare, truly innovative
products.
Now that I'm pretty much sold on the VSL, my thoughts are turning to
questions of how to deploy all this - maybe a rack with four or five
inexpensive (but fast) machines in it, networked together.
But this would belong in another thread.

again,
thank you all,

David Reiser

By the time you add in GigaStudio, an audio card and MIDI interface (unless you have a total PC system and can use MIDIoverLAN), there's no such thing as an inexpensive system as these three parts alone can comprise almost $1300 of the cost of a computer, unless you use a lower priced digital card like the Frontier Wave Center or the Tascam TDIF card.

Our VSL oriented systems are shipping in either a RAID configuration to handle the entire Pro Edition within one machine (400GB D-Drive), or two systems with a 200 GB drive in each to house the .gig files.

Realistically, one good system to start, a second to expand when you've mastered the library a bit. And then if you feel you need it, possibly a third system.

Hope this helps.

Peter Alexander
peter@truespec.com
www.truespec.com
310-559-3779

VSl in its current state will run wonderfully on a Duron 1.3, jsut laod it up with RAM, get a mobo with 2 pc133 slots and dump 1 GB for 98 in it, (or do 1.5 in XP)

poly counts dont reach extremely high limits with the performance set, but can get higher with some of the cube patches using Xfades and RTriggers.

you can build a machine that will run 160 poly for around 500 bucks INCLUDING a cheap audio card nowadays (add 100 for quiet parts). They may not have the best convertors, but you can render digitally/internally if you need to for final mixes, or get a digital card instead (you'll need somethign to route all those digital signals tho). This is of course the build it yourself model [;)]

The problems shows up with Gigastudio lisences. Each one is about 350-400 bucks, so you end up paying as much as your computer. You could try converting it to another sampler format to save money.

Use MIDI over LAN for MIDI if you can.

this is the poor man's approach to get lots of power. It will work wonderfully.

I however have been building super computers with gigabit LAN's on CSA and lots of RAM and raptor drives to get more poly out of some other stuff I've been doing with VSL [:)] these will be KICK BUTT machines pushing the sampling/programming envelopes ehehee.


BTW I seriously believe that you can get 160 poly out of even slower machines, but Durons 1.3 is the lowest I have in my giga setups thats actually being put to some good use and it works nicely.

IMO giga doesn't need as much tweaking on your DAW as something like a sequencer does. Just stick with 98SE, and use it as a "sampling box" and you'll be fine for the most part.

KI Sir,
I'm intrigued. I figure that I can put together a 2.2 GHz machine (with 10 Mbit ethernet but w'out audio card) for about $550. We are currently
using MidiMan Audiophile 2496's - am interested in recommendations for others. Also, I'm very excited about MIDIoverLAN. I had less midi latency problems on Apple II's and Atari's than I do with a Unitor8 over USB on a 1 GHz machine, and the intense competition for best LAN performance from both the adapters and the OS's makes me think that midi over ethernet is the way to go (even if it weren't cheaper).
Say you put together a system with six machines, one for the recorder,
one for the sequencer, and four sample players. You can get good rackmounts for about $1,000 each, plus $400 for the rack, sequencer and
recording software for about $600 each, 4 * $400 for the Giga licences,
and ~$400 for Sonar (I talked to them today and asked them if I would have to buy a separate license for each processor - the sales person said that if I were the only one using them, he didn't think I would have to (this was not an official ruling)). Add $3,090 for VSL and it adds up to ~$14,000, for an unbelievable digital orchestra. This ain't peanuts, (especially for musicians), but it's not the end of the world either. About half of this cost is software - the audio software (especially the sample libraries) are labor intensive, and whoever produces them deserves the money. Also, it seems like some real breakthroughs have occurred recently (like with VSL Performance) which mean that after spending all that money, you might produce music that sounds so good that people won't notice (or care) that it's a digital performance.
It seems like we're getting very close to realizing the dream that many
of us have had.

thanks for stirring things up,

David Reiser

David,

Its possible to get some GREAT hardware for damn newar nothing nowadays.

And it will even get cheaper with some upcomming tools and options that will be comming shortly.

A p4 2.2 sounds great, and will give you horesepower for some stuff in giga 3.0.

In all honesty, for giga and VSL in its current form, to get great performance, its quite fine to go with older cheaper parts. PC133 RAM is half the price of the faster DDR stuff. Duron's are fast enough to keep up with 160 poly. Cheap mobo's that will work can be found ecerywhere. The poor man's approach is reall here for alot of people [;)]

That said. if I were you, I'd consider going slower with building machines and look at gigabit LAN. 2 or 3 at a time. You'll be able to save money building slower and build to what you need, as well, things will change soon. There's new software from NI, Tascam, and others that can make some differences. Not to mention, more hardware options. (more Faster S-ata drives). Its the wrong time to dump 14000 on a full setup right now if you ask me. Beginning your set up, seems like more of an idea. Then again, you can never have enough horsepower. 7 machines here right now not including the laptops (well 3 unbuilt but parts are here), and I'm not looking at stopping. [:)] Hans Zimmer here I come.

@dsr said:

Say you put together a system with six machines, one for the recorder,
one for the sequencer, and four sample players. You can get good rackmounts for about $1,000 each, plus $400 for the rack, sequencer and
recording software for about $600 each, 4 * $400 for the Giga licences,
and ~$400 for Sonar (I talked to them today and asked them if I would have to buy a separate license for each processor - the sales person said that if I were the only one using them, he didn't think I would have to (this was not an official ruling)). Add $3,090 for VSL and it adds up to ~$14,000, for an unbelievable digital orchestra. This ain't peanuts, (especially for musicians), but it's not the end of the world either. About half of this cost is software - David Reiser

David,
First of all I do think that you forgot some stuff. For example the audio cards. At the time I did use 3 GS machines there was in my studio over 5000 $ in worth of audio cards- 3 RME DSP and 2 * MOTU 2408. Second: Since having 2 Mac's I did try to use one for audio and the other for MIDI; Apart making things more complicated IMHO it did really not improve much. A last but not least: I did eliminate 2 of my GS machines (!) and only use one as well as the ESX24 on the Mac. This decision came after hearing some very good production made with only one GS machine (among them some VSL demos....) Of course this needs some abstract representation ( or inner hearing) of your music, because you will not be able to hear all instruments until a advanced stage of production. But for me personally it does work great and I think that I do work faster and better this way. Think about all the nice things you could do with all this money..... [8-)]

Iwan
http://www.iwanroth-sax.com