Hi Anand,

could you provide a link with downloadable .wav files of these (in your internal sequencer resolution)?

Hi Goran

Sure. I cannot access to my home computer now but will send you the links tonight (US time).

Thanks

Anand

I have uploaded them to dropbox, Also added a MIRx version. Let me know if you are not able to get the wave files.

These are wave files generated from the Sibelius. (I did notice that these wave files  sound slightly poorer in quality compared to when played directly within Sibelius using VE, but that is another puzzle I need to solve,)

Thank you for any input.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/7v0hxzeosim50gc/stringq2b_C.wav?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/39oujrtr7ssqbkc/stringq2b_B.wav?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/w09drifsjhrpap7/stringq2b_A.wav?dl=0

Just got to listen to your examples, and the biggest difference in colour seems to me to be between the example C vs A and B (added emphasis on the middle/higher "ssssss" region, probably around or above 10 kHz - A & B are much "softer" there). A & B are different in colour as well, but the difference sounds to me like the difference in the way the rooms amplify different parts of the frequency spectrum (that is, "room response" coloration) - strongly noticable in the emphasized lower (around 100 Hz) and middle (between 500 Hz and 1 kHz) areas of example B. (Especially the very "reverberant" amplification of the 100 Hz area seems to point to a room response, not to a change in the frequency content of the dry signal.)

BTW, a very promising string quartet exercise - you have a strong feeling for "non-trivial" formal development and harmony deployment (though still a bit "uncontrolled", at least for my ears and taste...). I would say, you just continue developing and polishing your compositional skills in this direction 👍

...and, very good performance shaping work as well..

Thank you for listening and the comments.

I particularly appreciate your point about "uncontrolled" harmony deployment. I am not very strong with handling harmony yet and its very good to confirm that from a trained year.

Regarding the color, (firstly i note that C was using MIRx, B was MIRpro with Mozartsaal conductor position and A with just Algo.)

While the differences might be because of the rooms, I feel that the sustain and detache patches of the solo strings have an artificial feel at some points. If I may request you do one more quick listen, I uploaded a fuller version of that piece. The problem occurs for instance around 0:55 - 1:03 seconds, where I use the detache, and it sounds a bit synthy.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/m5ube7n9uepfeef/stringq2_MIRPRO.wav?dl=0

https://soundcloud.com/ankumar333/stringq2-mirpro/s-7NEiL#t=0:55

It feels like some frequency stretching is going on. I would appreciate your opnion on if this is what is expected. I just want to make sure I am not doing something wrong, I expected these samples to sound good 'out of the box' (much the same way as any cometently recorded live violin piece will sound on a CD).

Regarding performance, I am quite amazed by how well VI works with sibelius. I didnt  tweak a single controller for this, its all played out of Sibelius notation. thanks to cool programming by VSL.

Best Regards

Anand

@goran_tsch said:

Just got to listen to your examples, and the biggest difference in colour seems to me to be between the example C vs A and B (added emphasis on the middle/higher "ssssss" region, probably around or above 10 kHz - A & B are much "softer" there). A & B are different in colour as well, but the difference sounds to me like the difference in the way the rooms amplify different parts of the frequency spectrum (that is, "room response" coloration) - strongly noticable in the emphasized lower (around 100 Hz) and middle (between 500 Hz and 1 kHz) areas of example B. (Especially the very "reverberant" amplification of the 100 Hz area seems to point to a room response, not to a change in the frequency content of the dry signal.)

BTW, a very promising string quartet exercise - you have a strong feeling for "non-trivial" formal development and harmony deployment (though still a bit "uncontrolled", at least for my ears and taste...). I would say, you just continue developing and polishing your compositional skills in this direction 👍

...and, very good performance shaping work as well..

Love your example.

I am experiencing similar "problem" and find myself trying to correct certain frequencies in the wet signal of MIR PRO.

Dietz, I love MIR PRO, but I think this needs to be fixed in future versions. This "coloration" needs to be reduced which should make a big difference.

@agitato said:

....The problem occurs for instance around 0:55 - 1:03 seconds, where I use the detache, and it sounds a bit synthy.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/m5ube7n9uepfeef/stringq2_MIRPRO.wav?dl=0

It feels like some frequency stretching is going on...

Hello agitato

You obviously produce the music via Sibelius. A problem for composers who are using samples is, that they compose: here sfz, there sustain and here staccato... and then at first they often are disappointed about the result. Why?

One thing is that you sometimes should change the articulation from note to note even if nothing is to change seen from the musically point of view. Also tempo changes, the velocity changes are sometimes necessary for getting a natural sounding result. Furter, with samples you should not select the articulation by its name but by its sound for getting the just mentioned natural sounding result. Sometimes it is very OK to start a section of notes with a diminuendo (because of the nice bow in the volume at the beginnning) and then change to legato.... Even if it finally sounds great it would look stupid in the score to start with "dim"...

The long and the short of it: If you set great store by a natural and realistic sound I recommend to write your notes with Sibelius but to play them with a DAW because you can change every parameter note by note, so that you get the sound you really have in your mind.

As a little example:

How would you organize just the different velocities between each 16th in Sibelius?

Another short example: http://www.beat-kaufmann.com/vitutorials/vi-tips--tricks-4/index.php (Nr 34) It shows the difference between a really simple! playback of a notation program and the same but more treated version - out of a DAW.

... So your "détaché-stretching-part" can be solved by changing articulations between each note. Try to find the best sounding combination can take quite a lot of time.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

About Convolution Reverbs

Most of those revebs are coming with a lot of different room prints of different concert halls. Altiverb is famous for hundreds of such roomprints (Impulse Responses = IRs). And because all of these rooms have their own sound also the music (played through it)  has the sound of the certain selected room. There is nothing wrong. As Dietz mentioned above you either like those "colours" or not or you search one which has not so much colours. VSL offers in general a good pool of venues which are at least not coloured by capturing those IRs.

Here is a solution (Nr. 36) how you can reduce the typical room modes when you are using a "common" Convolution Reverb of VSL (not MIRx / MIRPro).

All the best and a lot of sucess with your samples

Beat

This needs to be fixed. Period. If the above piece was played live at the same venue, I highly doubt we would be complaining about how it sounds... Some incorrect assumptions have been made which need to be looked at again. I want to see MIR PRO get better, and I won't accept as an answer "Deal with it or change software". I am sorry.

Also, you may need to push the dry ratio higher. I do this more with solo strings especially.

Deat Beat,

Thank you for the detailed response. I will listen to your examples.

I think my point was not clear. I am not at all disappointed with the handling of note-by-note articulation changes by vienna. In fact I think Vienna instruments does a great job of handling it smoothly. While I dont disagree that the performance can be made more realistic with further tweaking in a DAW, I find that notating these changes directly on the score is a quick way to get me almost there. I used to use Sonar 8, and did not enjoy using key switches and so on. With Sibelius, notes, dynamics, articulations and tempo are all in one place and is also playable by a real muscians.

And, there is so much consistency in tone across the vienna samples, that allows the midi performance to sound a lot like a real performance. 

But, my problem rather is with some of the individual notes in the samples themselves, particularly the sustain and detache. While detache sounds realistic interms of note by note changes, the individual notes are sometimes synthy, as in my example. It puzzles me as to how this happened. Vienna did a very careful job of recording these samples. I am wondering if maybe the timbre was changed during processing or programming these notes for playability?

Anand

@nektarios said:

If the above piece was played live at the same venue, I highly doubt we would be complaining about how it sounds...

exactly my point...no professionally played violin will sound bad in any concert hall, or even in a garage. There will be a basic quality or timbre.

on the other hand a bad synthy timbre cannot sound good in any concert hall.

I just wanted to clarify the reason for my post.

I am new to Vienna SL and am very excited about this. I started with the solo strings and would liek the whole library at some point. The clips that I uploaded are the best I have been able to achieve compared with any other software I have used.

The reason for my post is to with some hope that the one thing I find problematic, i.e., quality of some of the samples, can be fixed. This would make this library just even more wonderful.

Thanks.

@agitato said:

I just wanted to clarify the reason for my post.

I am new to Vienna SL and am very excited about this. I started with the solo strings and would liek the whole library at some point. The clips that I uploaded are the best I have been able to achieve compared with any other software I have used.

The reason for my post is to with some hope that the one thing I find problematic, i.e., quality of some of the samples, can be fixed. This would make this library just even more wonderful.

Thanks.

I am with you on this. I want to see this already great product improved. The workflow of creating a new MIR PRO venue needs to be examined by VSL and evaluate what tweaks or workflow changes are needed to achieve this. 

@agitato said:

...The reason for my post is to with some hope that the one thing I find problematic, i.e., quality of some of the samples, can be fixed...

Hello again Anand

My post above was a bit "all-embracing". So I try it once more and an more focused on your upper point:

Maybe that some articulations (in your example 0:55-1:03) - and specially when they are played in a row - sound a bit synthy or what ever. Now, why don't you take another approach instead of the synthy sounding detache articulations. I always try the best sounding combinations what ever the name of the articulations are. In another situation that synthy detache has probably quite the right sound... Therefore my text about the DAW = easier for putting in unsusual articulations. BTW: Detache Articulations do have 3 layer levels as far as I know. Did you try to play them with the next higher level (louder?)

A further information: Library producers are faced with the dilemma that their samples should sound very! neutral but nevertheless and simultaneously musical. As soon as the balance tip to one side the certain sample will be recognized at any time when it's played... So improving samples for "a good sound in one certain situation" is the best idea.

But also:  Playing music with samples is making compromises at any time. You don't have a sad, warm, lovely, nice or shiny legato you have just legato. This is sometimes not easy for musisicians when the start with samples...

So: See your library as a pool of thousands of different tones (incl. all different layers of the samples). Choose just the one which sounds closest to your idea... you will find one without any improvement of VSL.  

Beat

Thanks Beat. I will try the different velocity layers, but this will affect the context of the piece.

But given I am very lazy, the beauty of this rendering was that I did not have to do anything and almost got a very good performance directly playing from Sibelius. While tweaking and compromise is common for any other sample libraries VSL, is far better and I was just wishing the sample quality will also be perfect.

I will try your other suggestions as well.

Best

Anand

@Another User said:

I expected these samples to sound good 'out of the box' (much the same way as any cometently recorded live violin piece will sound on a CD).

@goran_tsch said:

VSL doesn't work that way 😉 - what you get with VSL is first class "raw" material, but then you have to shape it into the final result yourself (and that both in the performance shaping and audio engineering departments). This has the great advantage of VSL libraries being compatible with as good as any production environment and sound/performance "aesthetics" (which no other library I have and use (EW Hollywood libraries, 8dio woodwinds, Cinematic Strings etc.) can claim). On the other hand, the learning curve is somewhat less steep, as you have to take care of every aspect of the production yourself,   

Goran,

thanks again for listening.

Maybe the mistake I make is to expect a sample library to sound like a real performance while actually, it should be compared to recorded performances, since the samples themselves are recorded. In other words, while I could expect a perfect sound in a live concert hall if a written score is performed by professional musicians (no processing is done by live listeners), an accurate recording and reproduction of that sound is another level of professional work altogether. So I guess one has to learn the tricks of mastering the sound with samples as well. 

But to me the ability of Vienna instruments to interpret the score so effectively is a major step. This is in fact FAR better than East west, partly because their samples (at least the SO) are not consistent across various articulations, in terms of velocity and texture. With VSL solo strings I the performance seems very well connected as articulations switch rapidly. I guess the missing part for me is why does the sound come out synthy sometimes. I have noted in some other posts here that the sound is almost always synthy, much worse than what I get. I did not do any audio processing beyond the rendering, so I am not sure how they can get worse performance compared to me. But thats a different matter

I suppose you are saying that the individual samples (example detache or sustain) are by themselves as good as what can be achieved with sampling technology today, but when put together in a performance, additional audio mastering steps need to be taken using DAW to achieve realism? (In other words, it is incorrect to assume that just because the individual samples are good quality, putting them together will sound good 'out of the box', whether one uses keyboard input or notation software like Sibelius etc., but needs some post processing). 

Thanks

Anand

@Another User said:

In other words, it is incorrect to assume that just because the individual samples are good quality, putting them together will sound good 'out of the box', whether one uses keyboard input or notation software like Sibelius etc., but needs some post processing. 

Exactly, this assumption is fundamentally incorrect - the VSL is a first class virtual instrument, but it won't make music for you - just as a first class violin you may posess won't play itself for you. YOU have to play the instrument in both cases - a very important point one sometimes tends to forget...

@goran_tsch said:

...the VSL is a first class virtual instrument, but it won't make music for you - just as a first class violin you may posess won't play itself for you. YOU have to play the instrument in both cases...

For showing Goran's statement: Twice the same piece with VSL-products....

Paganini a

Paganini b

Have fun

Beat

Thank you for the convincing examples.

Granted that post-production MIDI processing is necessary, I am trying to understand what is missing in the playback and VI interaction that makes this performance shaping necessary.

For instance the 'Paganini b' version sounds less convincing than the 'a' version (which is almost as good as a real performance btw). It seems that there are artifical delays between the notes in 'b', almost as if a slow processor, or hard drive and poor latency is the reason. Is this because VI cannot respond fast enough to the articulation changes?

If this piece was notated in Sibelius and all articulations and dynamics were placed properly, and the computer was fast enough, I am not sure why it would sound like the 'b'. It may not be as good as 'a' but still, shouldnt we be closer to 'a' than 'b' with an 'out of the box' rendering and proper notation? 

sorry to be a pain, or if my question doesnt make sense. I am not disagreeing that more performance shaping is necessary, but I am trying to understand why VI cannot handle this automatically. Of course, one could say that shaping allows one to change the expressions according to what is desired, but the example 'b' is not ready for that.

From my little experience with VI it does an amazing job with Sibelius and gets me 90% of the way (to my ear at least). I will need to learn further about performance shaping to fix the remaining 10%. The example 'b' above is not yet 90% in my opinion and thats why I was trying to clarify....

Thank you