@Dominique said:

Glad you like my mix so much. My Eq-settings are no secret, but since I have different settings for each section and two instances of eq for each it's a bit difficult to share. I try to attach some pictures to show you the settings. As said, there's a first instance of eq with individual settings for each section. Then there's a second instance where all violins have the same settings, and Celli and basses have the same (the violas have no second instance of eq). Maybe this is of some use to you. I'd like to hear if it helps in the middle part.

Thank you sooo much!!! Really appreciate it!!! I will now revert to my original chord voicing and apply your EQ settings. 😊😊😊

Out of curiosity, what do you use for B Violins in Diemnsion Strings? Is it 4 for Violins I, and 4 for Violins II? I ended up using Chamber Strings for my B violns. 

I'm demoing that EQ (Equilibrium) at the moment. It's like the Lamborghini of EQ's.

Wow, maybe I should give it a shot! 

@nektarios said:

Wow, maybe I should give it a shot! 

http://dmgaudio.com/products_equilibrium.php

Demo available. Personally I probably won't buy it, because I'm not EQ-skilled enough to drive it; but I keep playing with the demo because it's pretty awesome.

So what features make an EQ a great EQ? Never understood this. I use Epure by Flux. 

Here is the link: http://www.fluxhome.com/products/plug_ins/epure-v3

Again, I don't know how to compare them...

@nektarios said:

So what features make an EQ a great EQ? Never understood this. I use Epure by Flux. 

Here is the link: http://www.fluxhome.com/products/plug_ins/epure-v3

Again, I don't know how to compare them...

Full-screen mode; and highly configurable display.

"Filters include: Coincident, Butterworth, Chebyshev, Bessel, Critical, Legendre, Elliptic, Allpass types"

Most EQ's don't give you such choices, and you can choose different filter types for different bands.

It also gives you great control over phase.

It also models filter-shapes from some classic EQ's.

I wouldn't know what to do with all those filter choices and control over phase, but I think those would be valuable to skilled engineers. I'm going to check out the classic-EQ emulation next. Maybe a gimmick, or maybe those EQ's are classic for a good reason.

You're welcome, I'm glad that I could help. Personally I think that most current Eqs are up to the task, but I'm no expert. If you have VSL Suite this Eq will be just fine, or the one that comes with your DAW. You really don't need to have Equilibrium to achieve the same sound like in my mix.

Good to hear that you are going back to the first chord voicings, I really like them. As to my Dimension String setup: I created a template with 10 first violins, 8 second violins, 6 violas, 6 celli, and 4 basses. Each section divided in two subgroups. The additional numbers in the violins come from using different articulations, and a different grouping of players in the first and second violins. So for example, in violins 1 (10 players), I grouped them player 1 to 5 in subsection a, and players 3 to 7 in subsection b. Between these subsections I was careful not to use the same articulations when the same player is used. So, if in the subsection a player 5 plays regular legato, I use perf trill legato from player 5 for the legato in subsection b. That means that even when subsection a and b play together (what they often do), you don't hear the same sample twice. Player five is also used in the subsection b of the second violins (4 players). So I had to be careful to choose a different sample yet for legato. Here I used the legato espressivo on the d string as legato articulation.

A short example: lets assume I use this template to mock up a short stretch where first violins and second violins play in unison. Player five will then be used thrice (once in violins 1 subsection a, once in violins 1 subsection b, and once in second violins subsection b). Yet all samples will be different, because in each of these subsections a different patch will be triggered from player 5 (the regular legato, the perf trill legato, and the legato espressivo on the d string). So I use the many articulation choices you have in Dimension Strings to bolster up the number of players. It takes some time to make such a template and you have to be careful to always use different patches, but once it's done it's great. Saxer made a similar template and uploaded it on these forums. That's where I got the idea from.

Looking forward to applying your EQ settings when I go home after work! 

Wow, thanks for that info! You really opened my eyes. This is a very elaborate setup. As for my setup in VE Pro, I  have 24 audio channels with a mix of different sustain articulations. This means, everytime I make melodic changes it's a nightmare! Now I am thinking of maybe changing to a template where each instrument group has it's own single midi channel controlling all the VE Pro channels (otherwise it's too tedious). Once the song is done, I would expand the midi channels for each instrument.

When you say you divide each section to subgroups, what do you mean? You mean groups that are controlled by a single midi channel?

As for EQs, I have Vienna Suite, so I guess I'll use that.

Thanks again!

Exactly, each subgroup has it's own midi channel. So the whole string orchestra uses nine different midi channels (the bassi are not divided). Of course you could use a different channel for each player, but I found this impractical to work with. It simply takes too long to play in every player individually, and I found the sonic benefits to be marginal compared to the extra work it takes. Two passes for each section plus the humanization feature of VI Pro gives me enough variation to sound great. And very rarely do I write divisi in more than two groups per section. So this template is a t the sweetspot of sonic details and workspeed for me.

Another trick I learned from Saxer: use tempo as variable to switch between VI Pro matrix cells, and then for the fast tempo use higher humanization features. This way, when playing a fast run, intonation and timing are more blurred, just like in a real violin section!

Thanks! I see now. It does make sense. Working with 24 channels (and that's just the strings) makes for a very slow process indeed...

Hi,

This is a most interesting thread or conversation. I've listened to all the examples and there is a lot of improvement that is audible in the course of events.

Some remarks however. I read that MIR was used to define the room. Actually, MIR isn't quite fit for small ensembles (Dimensions, 4-4-3-2-1 or something of that kind?). And equalising is not the miracle solution either. The way the samples sound (harmony connections, articulations, Xfades...) will be as important. 3-chords moving about in a limited low area will sound dull and obscure. Some variation in tonal height could brighten this up, provided this is the wanted of course. The dimension samples have been recorded with ultimate precision and there's little EQ that could improve their richness. I would only use EQ-ing to help them localise (less high frequencies (= less presence) for more distant instruments...) and to filter the master from unwanted uppertones. You really don't need a high-tech EQ-program for that. VSL offers a very good one in the Vienna Suite or any DAW has one on board that will do exactly what you want. For the rest, choose dynamic articulations that come near to a live performance: bow movements are not continuous equal movements, there's always a dynamic difference in it (start to stop, an attack, a diminuendo or crescendo, light, heavy pressure, short/long bows, all of these present in the Dimensions). A good advice: start the Standalone VI and fiddle with the articulations, while you play your chords and try to make a good choice to your taste and to the colour wanted.

I wish you good luck!

Max

PS: here's an example made with the same strength of Dimensions mentioned above:

Example: Rameau, Contredanse

Thank you Max! Really enjoyed the piece! 😊