@noldar12 said:

No, rather, it made the instrument sound more fake

I found the same thing within the EW libraries, where some errors literally ruined the library imo. But unlike EW, the ideal sample library would be utterly massive. Every articulation has repititions, no? Assume every articulation having 10 reps per articulation (if not more in some cases). Now imagine 10 less than perfect tunings as an alternative articulation. I'd rather have a base 'perfect performance' for all my articulations, then a respectable section of 'imperfect' alternatives I could put it it's place if I want. That would not sound more fake, but only allow for more control and more convincing than a sequencer can mimic it.

Pitch bending a whole string section isn't realistic. Using a solo violin, chamber, and orchestral and pitch bending each or some of them- again is not realistic. 100% divisi would probably be as realistic for fake humanizing as it can get, but of course this comes with it's own problems. Faking the human touch can never be as convincing as the real thing. The real thing is the ultimate goal of a sample library. If you wanted to fake everything, get Wallender's instruments instead of VSL. But as it stands, if a library's goal is to be as convincingly real and as flexible as real as they can be- then eventually real recorded 'human factor' would have to be a part of that plan.

Ultimately, a real orchestra is preferable for several reasons including this one. But where I'm not in a position to make my own library or budget a real one- then I can't see how my suggesting more actual realism is being so disputed on here. Call me crazy, but that just seems odd to me. [:S]

-Sean

I've just been reading about Adagio and thought I'd pipe in with two things about their approach that I really like and would love to see in this future VSL string product we're all fantasizing about. Well, two things apart from divisi and second violins, which we're all counting on. 

1) "round-robin" legato

2) several legato patches with different feels. I wouldn't have thought to ask for that from one prduct, and I think it's a great idea.

Didger, it is interesting that with VI Pro 2, different legato feels are possible (at least to some extent).  As one can change the timings of different portions of a legato patch, it is possible to create alternatives.  Most of the full string libraries (though not all) contain both slow and fast legato.  One can then make further changes and end up with at least 4-6 different legato feels fairly easily.  Whether the results are what one is after is, admittedly, another question.  From my own initial testing, I have found that I sometimes prefer some of my VI Pro 2 alternate legato patches to the original "stock" ones (depending on desired result, of course).

In general, IMO, it is helpful to test and try different things, to learn what the existing software can (or cannot) do before seeking new libraries or additions to existing library additions.

 VSL already has some out of tune samples. I never use them. [;)]

I also think that if I heard a live violin section playing in this "imperfect" way on one of my sessions I'd top and do a re-take. A section not playing in tune together is not a good sound, and although it may, in some strange way, sound more real, it doesn't sound good to me.

DG

@DG said:

I also think that if I heard a live violin section playing in this "imperfect" way on one of my sessions I'd top and do a re-take.

I don't mean this as an insult, but more in humor... but have you even ever heard an orchestra!? Conducted one!? lol, I'm sure you are have compitent musical experience behind you- but no group plays every last note perfectly in tune all the time. Besides being physically impossible for human beings, if you had machines playing instruments instead of people- you'd probably get the same result some people seem to want on here. VSL doesn't sound like a machine; but if you left 'unhumanized' the result is certainly not a convincing performance.

I hear a lot of people gripe about intonnation like it makes or breaks a performance. I have always considered myself to have VERY picky standards here. Growing up, I never liked a string section lower than the highest of professional quality because of intonnation. However, even professionals aren't absolutely perfect; and if I can recognize that with my snobbish distaste for 95% of the performaning string ensembles out there, I guess I just don't understand how others here can't. [*-)]

I've had many experiences where people complain about pitch just to make a big deal about something. Meanwhile, those with very good sense of intonnation or even perfect pitch are often the ones not complaining. One of my favorite performances of Mahler's 8th has a Soprano that goes slightly out of tune and that note sounds 100x better than if it wasn't. It's a divine moment in the recording. It works. It's a powerful and effective performance. I've heard imperfections in the greatest film scores. So do I think I've made a decent case for why humanizing matters? Yes. Did VSL add humanize features for valid reasons and because people wanted them? Yes! The point I have been trying to make isn't about humanizing, because anyone with any experience and common sense I would expect would already agree with this! I mean no offense by that, but I feel it's a common sense point. In the end, if you want VSL to be perfect, great. But there's no harm in suggesting 'less perfect samples' also. I'm not saying VSL should switch to a crappy performance, but include optional 'slightly less than perfect' alternate performances.

The real point I've been trying to argue isn't even that the 'human touch' matters. I'm arguing that mimicing it with VI Pro isn't as convincing as the real deal- in some cases you don't even have the option. You can't "humanize" a recording of 14 violins. And if VSL used their less than perfect recordings to build an 'alternate imperfect repetitions' base or something, then VSL would have put together the best possible method of accomplishing a convincing performance. It wouldn't be as horribly performed as some other libraries sound, plus you'd still have all those perfect samples you want if you don't like humanizing samples. The benefit is that it also wouldn't be a 'mimiced' sound from VI Pro that isn't as convincing as a real recording. No one is really arguing that point with me and that's the suggestion I'm actually posting on here anyway.

-Sean

@noldar12 said:

Didger, it is interesting that with VI Pro 2, different legato feels are possible (at least to some extent).

Yes, of course. But if the rumours are true and VSL's working on "Dimension Strings," I'm just saying this would be a great addition. I adore the VI Pro 2/ MIR Pro combo, both for the amount of flexibility it gives through tweaking it, and also because it's the closest thing to just making expressive music out of the box rather than having to be a programmer. That could only be improved with the Adagio model of multiple sampled legatos. I'd love to be able to alter my VSL template for any given piece in a moment by selecting whether the strings were recorded with ET, Sunset Boulevard, the Jupiter Symphony or, God forbid, Inception in mind. 

iscorefilm,  DG is a conductor, violinist, composer and MIDI programmer whose work is as good as anything on this site.  Maybe better.  But he doesn't post it.    I have said what you are saying about a hundred times - that imperfection is needed with MIDI.  But the point DG was making (I venture to state - sorry DG) is that the imperfection on this Adagio library is going to backfire, because it is too much.  I noticed on the demos that it sounded far too out of tune on the target notes of those legato patches.  The repetitive aspect will surface if you ever have to hear that same out of tune effect.  That is where a RANDOMIZED digital lack on tuning is superior than a built-in recorded one.  For example - if you create two layered tracks that are digitally detuned, you will not be able to tell the difference between that mix and a real one out of tune.  Another example - that swell patch - it was far too regular.  Every swell was the same.  I would never end up using that supposed feature.  Totally artificial sounding and no players would ever do that so regularly except on a sample library.   

One other thing - within the VSL samples already are many very useable examples of variation, detuning and imperfection.  These are besides the VI Pro digital presets.   Just check out the lists of Appassionata, Orchestral, etc.    Incredible amount of variation has already been recorded. 

Not to say that more would be unwelcome though!    Especially something like  Dimension Strings.  If you listen to the Dimension Brass, part of the great feature on that library is the slight, very musical detuning between the individual players and the variation audible in the exact performances.  So that would presumably be a major aspect of a new, supplemental (not exclusive)  VSL string section that would allow both auto-divisi and even more variations of tuning/performance.  

@Another User said:

Not to say that more would be unwelcome though!    Especially something like  Dimension Strings.  If you listen to the Dimension Brass, part of the great feature on that library is the slight, very musical detuning between the individual players and the variation audible in the exact performances.  So that would presumably be a major aspect of a new, supplemental (not exclusive)  VSL string section that would allow both auto-divisi and even more variations of tuning/performance.  

...That is exactly what I'm hoping for. [:D] Performers adjust to each other. Strings that aren't as static as what VSL has now, but not poorly performed as other libraries are- is the ultimate goal. I can still appreciate tuning things off with humanize if people want a seriously detuned performance. But VSL could be less strictly unorganic while still performing things 'relatively perfectly in tune' (now there's an oxymoron!). I've been giving examples in my analogies that involved multiple recordings with different options... but the way you explained the Dimension concept here I think sums up exactly what I, and probably most of us, want.

-Sean

William,

I think you are quite right here:

"But the point DG was making (I venture to state - sorry DG) is that the imperfection on this Adagio library is going to backfire, because it is too much. I noticed on the demos that it sounded far too out of tune on the target notes of those legato patches."

Yes, and that is what gets quite (and each time more) annoying after three or four times listening at some Adagio demos. I don't have any orchestra recording at home of a quality orchestra that suffers from this level of tuning.

"The repetitive aspect will surface if you ever have to hear that same out of tune effect. That is where a RANDOMIZED digital lack on tuning is superior than a built-in recorded one."

Or maybe: scripted built-in one. I don't know.

For example - if you create two layered tracks that are digitally detuned, you will not be able to tell the difference between that mix and a real one out of tune. Another example - that swell patch - it was far too regular. Every swell was the same. I would never end up using that supposed feature. Totally artificial sounding and no players would ever do that so regularly except on a sample library.

I also agree here with you.

Adagio has a nice overall sound in their demos, I think, and, to be honest, for me more appealing than many VSL legato patches, but that Adagio tuning issue will be hard to solve I guess. It is the same reason why I can't or just don't dare to use LASS without layering with other products very often, if I use it anyway. But again: then I am able (and I want to be able) to manage the balance in the mix.

I sincerely hope that it is worthwhile to wait for the Dimension Strings, more flexibility and, as far as I am concerned, a better and more open basic string sound.

I just uploaded the 8DIO page on my blog with (19!!) new examples, based on the midi versions of the "swell melody" as offered by 8DIO themselves. You and/or others might find it interesting. It concerns VSL and many many others.

I am in full agreement with DG.  What scares me about what some developers call "realism" simply, is to me, very sloppy and bad playing - playing at a level that simply does not fly. 

Sometimes, it seems to me, that what people expect in terms of "realism" is a specific special effect, that has little to do with what would be regarded as normal solid technique (extreme bow attack noise being one of the most severe examples).

One of the drawbacks with samples (and I am glad VSL's samples are less forgiving) is that one can create pieces without really knowing how an instrument works.  In strings, the issue often shows up in discussions regarding portamento/bow stroke technique/legato playing.  Nevertheless, "One doesn't know, what one doesn't know," and educating/teaching about these, and similar, issues is always a good thing.

@DG said:

I also think that if I heard a live violin section playing in this "imperfect" way on one of my sessions I'd top and do a re-take.

I don't mean this as an insult, but more in humor... but have you even ever heard an orchestra!? Conducted one!?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. [:D]

Sorry, but having conducted professionally for nearly 25 years, 10 of those being in full-time employment, I find your comments very funny. Not that you'd know about my background, so I don't blame you.

However, I could ask the same question of you. Have you ever conducted a professional orchestra?

DG

I heard the demos and I agree that the intended "errors" are too frequent and grinding, and I would expect such only from a 3rd rate ensemble, and not as often as with the demonstration video. I must say I did like what I heard in some instances and perhaps there is some future potential there, however they are too expensive for what they offer at the moment in my opinion. Further, I must say I haven't worked with the Humanizer of VI PRO, but from the demos it looks that it can "compensate" for that error-feature much better (I'd rather be in control as to where the error occurs in my mix).

DG, I'm glad you got a laugh. I wasn't really even questioning whether you have worked with other professionals or not, but more of just trying to say that every last performance will be imperfect in some way. Either way, it is true that I am a youngin' and my experience conducting is limited... Just remember that I wasn't being serious, lol.

I think one of my favorite musical jokes just has to be shared after that- 'The guy just can't play his instrument, so they gave him two sticks and sent him to the back. He still couldn't play, so they took one away and sent him to the front.'

Anyway, I think we've resolved the tuning dispute with William's comment and my reply. I don't think things need to sound as imperfect as Adagio to sound real, just more dimension-brass-styled organic instead of being as static as things currently are. Hopefully we'll see Dimension Strings become a reality.

-Sean

@Another User said:

Anyway, I think we've resolved the tuning dispute with William's comment and my reply. I don't think things need to sound as imperfect as Adagio to sound real, just more dimension-brass-styled organic instead of being as static as things currently are. Hopefully we'll see Dimension Strings become a reality.

If your strings really do sound static, you need to ride the CCs much more. William has already given you some solutions for getting a more out of tune sound, should you require it. My main sound is a mixture of App, Chamb and Orch strings, and within that mixture I could easily make some tuning "errors", if I thought that they would improve the performance. Mostly I use timing though, because that makes the section seem to have more life to me.

DG

DG, I combine strings and primarily use timing to offset them just slightly from each other. I also adjust the attack and release to give smoother transitions when needed. A lot of people I know don't like doing this because they think it's not 'authentic enough' but in sampling, I find that a convincing demo is more important than doing things the "right" way. I don't feel the need to have things as out of tune as Adagio, and I appreciate sampling like VSL does now to have a good performance- but if I wanted to have an imperfection, I think a sample is more convincing than using Humanize to mimic the same result.

About your re-take comment, I guess I have to take what I said back. I had this mentality that 'unless it was perfect' you'd do it again. Your toleration zone bit clarified it for me.

By "static" I only mean that VSL if played without any adjustments to it, you won't get as organic of a performance. Rather than mimicing everything with the computer- the more that can be accurately accomplished with samples, the more convincing, imo. VSL does have dynamic patches, but again- my mentality is just that 'the more organic patches the merrier', instead of mimicing via software. I think when I say this, people think I don't like VSL's current method. I would still have all the same patches VSL currently has, just with the option of using a recording in place of cc'ing, humanize, changing attacks, etc. Hopefully that clarifies things.... I think? lol

-Sean

I didn't see an answer to 'do you have VI Pro 2?' If you don't, do, before you conclude that the tools are inferior to get that human error in there. VIP 2 has ways to get out-of-tune in time, determining the error by envelopes.

& it's a learning curve. It doesn't sound to me like you are familiar.

@iscorefilm said:

By "static" I only mean that VSL if played without any adjustments to it, you won't get as organic of a performance. 

the mistake on the soundstage (by a guess?), is going to be the same mistake every time. I don't get how convincing that will be at the end of the day. if you want that to be a number of these errors by a repeat menu, that's what VIP 2 provides specifically with its humanize.

I could be reading you wrong, you may be just frustrated with that approach in VIP 2. But more saliently I doubt VSL is going to record a lot of out-of-tune performances, *guessing* what's 'more organic' for you.

@iscorefilm said:

 I combine strings and primarily use timing to offset them just slightly from each other. I also adjust the attack and release to give smoother transitions when needed. A lot of people I know don't like doing this because they think it's not 'authentic enough' 

@civilization 3 said:

frankly this is the art of sequencing, that 'adustments' bit.

That is really true - it is the whole art of changing MIDI from sheet music playback of notation,  into a natural sounding performance.  Also what you say about the recorded inaccuracies is absolutely right -  as soon as you hear them a second time, you instantly know it's the same.  Very treacherous to do that on samples.   The VSL samples have just the right amount of accuracy vs. inaccuracy.  Plus, the  humanize functions in VI Pro are really good because of how adjustable they are - from subtle to extreme. 

anopther aspect that can detract from the realism is that players of strings and winds strive towards concordance in a way that samples, being straight 12 tones, equal, don't provide. so, VSL provides a few menus of intonations. in the general, we strive towards just intonation, a 5:4 type of major third for instance. so the VI Pro interface can allow us to eat our cake and have it too, a just intonation for the next key or what-not.