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! 😊