Vienna Symphonic Library Forum
Forum Statistics

185,273 users have contributed to 42,390 threads and 255,477 posts.

In the past 24 hours, we have 3 new thread(s), 23 new post(s) and 54 new user(s).

  • This piece has been played by a real symphony, and I prefer the VSL version

    I can't find a way to delete my post.

  • Ok, so it's been 5 months since I had posted my first attempt at realizing a string orchestra piece composed by my husband, David, using VSL back in January.  I appreciate the initial feedback and spent another month and a half re-doing the entire project.  In that time I have learned to how to avoid double dynamics by using velocity xfade sparingly (hopefully tastefully) turning it on and off as needed with CC28, learned to adjust the release of notes, and learned to assign two patches to one keyswitch so I can have a more defined start to legato phrases when I want them.  I also discovered it's better to work on each part 100% dry when working on keyswitches/phrasing so the reverb doesn't mask any sloppy releases and attacks. It's been a big learning curve but I am really appreciating the amount of manipulation I can do with VSL and hopefully I will get faster at the process.  

    So it took about another month and a half, removing all the expression, velocity xfade information, listening line by line and note by note (shocked at how much I missed the first ime) and redoing it all from scratch but the result has been a version that to me sounds lighter and more natural.  I like the amount of reverb but would love to hear your thoughts if it's too much/not enough.  I also mastered the new one it to match the EQ of my favourite string orchestra recording by the "Thirteen Strings of Ottawa".

    Here is the original from January:

    Here is the new one from March:

    Now, it is May and I have been fiddling around with a trial version of MIR.  I put the orchesta into the Schubert hall:

     I'm just learning how to use MIR so any feedback/suggestions you have would be appreciated.



  • last edited
    last edited

    Hi Becky,

    not bad for a start, there is still much headroom for improvement in all aspects though: performance shaping can be substanially refined (some legatos, microdynamics (especially on longer notes), better vibrato shaping); spatial positioning could be much more "3D" and less "flat" (you can listen to strings in f.e. Wagner & Dvorak examples here to hear what I mean by this).

    I hope my remarks make some sense in relation to what you hear πŸ˜‰

  • Hi Becky,

    I can only agree with Goran. Personally, I prefer the second version, not the MIR version.

    The right choice of the right samples for a particular technique is a tough business and takes probably most of the time. Some time ago, I hated this. All I wanted was writing music, the tedious resetting of everything in a DAW was such a waste of time. But in due course, I began to see that working in more detail delivers a far better result, which serves the purpose of our compositions better. Don't we want to present our audience a very decent listening? I think we all do. So it's worth the effort. To learn to master a bit better the VSL products, I resampled many classical or baroque works with different instruments or ensembles. The advantage is, that you can listen to good live performances and try to get as close to them as possible.

    The learning curve is long and steep, but so rewarding after a while. I wish you lots of courage and endeavour!


  • Thanks Max and Goran for your feedback.  I am currently only working with the chamber strings without the extended library.  I wish I had better control over changing the vibrato but I can't afford to pay for that yet. :) I tried my best to match the style of the orchestra that originally performed the piece. I admit that I could spend forever listening to each line, playing with dynamics, and shaping every note as perfectly as I can get and then the next day going back to it and changing my mind again but realistically there is just not enought time in a day and I have to draw the line with a final decision at some point.  I am still learning how to add more depth to the mixes - I love the feeling of getting the blend I was seeking (even if it does take forever to play with settings for now).  I am really enjoying VSL's interface and quality of the sounds though and it does provide a much more realistic mock-up for scores to hopefully entice more live ensembles to play the music.

     - Becky

  • I tried again in MIR and took advantage of MIR EQ and MIRacle.  I was blown away by the difference in sound quality.  I think I have found the clarity and warmth I've been looking for.

    Thanks again for your feedback!

  • last edited
    last edited

    Okay, this is a vast improvement over the last posting and the last posting wasn't too shabby.  Yes, I'm hearing a lot more definition in the strings as some of the lines in the last posting sounded blurred to me and the piece overall sounded raw production wise.


    What really impressed me was that you did this with just the Chamber Standard library.  Nice!!! πŸ‘

    The only problem is that you think that you are done with itπŸ˜”

    My first VSL piece I have reworked a total of 8 times and I think I'm going to rework it again. You buy new libraries, new software you learn a new technique, etc. and the temptation is just too great. 

    In fact, if you are in the market for Solo Strings, I'd love to hear this piece layered with the Solo strings then you're REALLY going to hear clarity and definition.  

  • Thanks Jasen. I'm excited to hear what this could sound like with the solo strings added.  So far I haven't yet tried combining instruments that way.  I know I'll come back to this piece in a month and want to rework it again but with pile of music yet to be realized, for now I'll have to take what I learned with this one and move on :)

    All the best,


  • PaulP Paul moved this topic from Orchestration & Composition on