Comparing Teldex and Synchron using Tchaikovsky

[Paul McGraw]

Just to satisfy my own curiosity and for the fun of it, I wanted to compare Teldex and Synchron using the exact same music to better judge the differences between the two. I am posting these two MP3 because others might enjoy the comparison also.

I used the first 1 minute of the Tchaikovsky Serenade for Strings. This is a very lush sounding minute of music with lots of double stops in various places. And by limiting myself to just strings, hopefully the differences in sound quality will be easier to hear between Teldex and Synchron. I used the VSL Orchestral Strings full, and added the Solo Strings full as first chair players. MIR Pro comes with an algorithmic reverb to add to the final mix, but I did not use it in this situation. The EQ and all other settings are the default settings for the instrument used.

Clip from Serenade for Strings - Teldex

Clip from Serenade for Strings - Synchron

[MMKA]

Thank you for sharing. Interesting to hear!

[vosk]

I have a feeling that this Synchron Studio was sampled using another (more new) technology than Teldex.. Maybe a new microphones? :)

[muziksculp]

Thanks for the demos.

I like the Synchron better than the Teledex version.  

The Synchron sounds warmer, lusher, and more natural.  I'm planning to buy the Synchron for MIR-Pro before the end of the special pricing. 

Cheers,

Muziksculp 

[Paul McGraw]

I'm glad that a few folks found the comparison useful. I like the sound of both venues. It is interesting the different reactions people have to each. If VSL does start a whole new library recorded wet at Synchron Stage I am confident it will be a success. 

[muziksculp]

@Paul McGraw said:

I'm glad that a few folks found the comparison useful. I like the sound of both venues. It is interesting the different reactions people have to each. If VSL does start a whole new library recorded wet at Synchron Stage I am confident it will be a success. 

Yes, I'm sure VSL's Sychron based libraries will sound much better than the original Silent-Stage based ones. 

Really looking forward to the release of the VSL Sychron Strings, and the rest of the Sychron Orchestra ! 

[Dietz]

@muziksculp said:

Yes, I'm sure VSL's Sychron based libraries will sound much better than the original Silent-Stage based ones. 

Well - let's agree on "different" rather than "better". 😊

[muziksculp]

@muziksculp said:

Yes, I'm sure VSL's Sychron based libraries will sound much better than the original Silent-Stage based ones. 

Well - let's agree on "different" rather than "better". 😊

Hi Dietz,

Yes... Sure, I agree with you, "different" is a good way to describe it, rather than "better',   Especially, since I have not heard the Sychron versions of the Orchestra. But, I'm super optimistic that the Sychron version of VSL Orchestra will sound AMAZING, and very very beautiful.  

Cheers,

Muziksculp 

[Dietz]

@muziksculp said:

[...] I'm super optimistic that the Sychron version of VSL Orchestra will sound AMAZING, and very very beautiful.  

That's for sure!  👍

[Paul McGraw]

I did an experiment comparing Berlin Brass to VSL Brass. Berlin Brass was recorded in Teledex, and since we have a Teledex venue for MIRx and MIR Pro I was able to do a head to head comparison. I can repost the comparison if anyone is interested.

Amazingly, to get a realistic sound comparable to VSL Brass, I had to use 3 microphones in Berlin Brass, close, Tree and Room. Those are included with Berlin Brass but the amount of RAM consumed to do so was huge. VSL instruments are very RAM efficient.

Anyway, I found the sound of the two virtually identical.  VSL Brass in MIR Teledex is very close to the exact room sound of Berlin Brass, which was recorded wet at Teledex. The only really obvious difference is between the tone quality of the various musicians who were sampled. Also VSL instruments are more consistent and offer more articulations and greater control. So I question how much more realistic a sample library could get compared to what we have now. Personally, based on my own experiments, I do not find "wet" samples to be inherently better than "dry" but it seems that wet is what the market is crazy for right now.

If VSL is going to invest in a complete "wet" library I will be a buyer, and I just hope we still have the wonderful VSL consistency and quality in the new products.

[PaoloT]

Paul, wet samples are much easier to use. You call for them, let them play, and the mix is nearly ready. With dry sample, you have to do all the positioning and mixing, that requires skills to avoid mudding everything. In this, I would say that MIR is a great help, removing several steps (and probably giving a more realistic result).

The current tendency is also to have warmer, fatter reverbs. Orchestral music was recorded in more neutral, "colder" rooms in the Seventies. Auditoriums built from the Eighties tend to sound warmer and thicker (think The Sage and Synchron, against Teldex).

I'm personally immediately impressed by warmer rooms, but at the same time prefer to go for neutral. Less beautiful, maybe, but more true.

Paolo

[muziksculp]

Hi,

Wet libraries represent the natural sonic character of the instrument/s , the physics of waves being captured by Mics.  and their reflections in a space. 

 

On the other hand, a dry signal (dry-samples), with artificial reverberation, or multiple IR's , MIR, Reverbs, ..etc. will always have a more audible aritifical component, which can be less realistic, or less natural sounding. This artificial component can be reduced by good engineering skills, but it's not an easy task, and no guarantee that a well trained ear will not spot some issues when hearing the production. 

Please let me know if I'm wrong here. 

 

Thanks,

Muziksculp 

[Paul McGraw]

@PaoloT said:

Paul, wet samples are much easier to use. You call for them, let them play, and the mix is nearly ready. With dry sample, you have to do all the positioning and mixing, that requires skills to avoid mudding everything. In this, I would say that MIR is a great help, removing several steps (and probably giving a more realistic result).

The current tendency is also to have warmer, fatter reverbs. Orchestral music was recorded in more neutral, "colder" rooms in the Seventies. Auditoriums built from the Eighties tend to sound warmer and thicker (think The Sage and Synchron, against Teldex).

I'm personally immediately impressed by warmer rooms, but at the same time prefer to go for neutral. Less beautiful, maybe, but more true.

Paolo

PaoloT - I agree with all of your points, except the preference for warm or cold rooms. Unlike yourself, I fear that I like both equally well and have a hard time deciding which I like better when doing a midi performance. That is one great thing about dry samples, we can use any sort of venue we like at that moment. With wet samples the venue is built into the samples and it would be close to impossible to change the sound unless you are an engineer. But as you say, it also makes it easy.

You also pinpointed the "muddiness" issue which I am struggling to learn how to avoid. I do not have a full orchestra of wet samples, just Berlin Brass. Do wet samples avoid the mud?

[Paul McGraw]

@muziksculp said:

Hi,

Wet libraries represent the natural sonic character of the instrument/s , the physics of waves being captured by Mics.  and their reflections in a space. 

On the other hand, a dry signal (dry-samples), with artificial reverberation, or multiple IR's , MIR, Reverbs, ..etc. will always have a more audible aritifical component, which can be less realistic, or less natural sounding. This artificial component can be reduced by good engineering skills, but it's not an easy task, and no guarantee that a well trained ear will not spot some issues when hearing the production. 

Please let me know if I'm wrong here. 

 Thanks,

Muziksculp 

Perhaps there are people who have the discernment to tell the difference between wet and dry samples when all else is equal. I do not have that ability. Here is a legato example I did to test Berlin Brass. It is the Berlin Brass first horn, then the VSL Vienna Horn playing the exact same phrase. Both use the legato patch only. On the Berlin example I use velocity cross fade and CC11 expression to try to shape the phrase. For the VSL horn I used velocity cross fade, CC11 expression, the attack parameter and the release parameters to shape the phrase. 

BB horn vs VSL horn

I am sure that Guy Bacos or Jay Bacal or William Kersten could have done a better job, but I think my VSL attempt sounds very convincing. If you try to focus on the room sound I think you will find they are identical. The Berlin Brass horn player has a better tone, but the VSL horn has a far superior legato quality. I state that as if it is a fact, but of course those are just my opinions. 

So is the wet sample better than the dry sample? I spent the money on Berlin Brass but would prefer to actually use VSL. What is your opinion?

Paul T. McGraw

[Jos Wylin]

It looks like this is a matter of preference or taste. Personally I prefer the first recording, the Teldex, but I really like more dry performances in general. I can hear more detail and typical instrumental (string) sounds other than the produced pitched signals (bowing, attack, friction of the bow...) with Teldex.

I assume Vienna had a good reason to publish the dry recordings. They created the possiblilty to use them in all kinds of venues and ambiences. The more 'coloured' version of Synchron will probably be more limited in use in other venues.
But I'm not a specialist and certainly not a sound engineer and my opinion is merely personal. Up to now, I'm quite satisfied with my 'dry' libraries and the venues provided. It's hard enough to learn to master them...

Max

[muziksculp]

@Max Hamburg said:

It looks like this is a matter of preference or taste. Personally I prefer the first recording, the Teldex, but I really like more dry performances in general. I can hear more detail and typical instrumental (string) sounds other than the produced pitched signals (bowing, attack, friction of the bow...) with Teldex.

I assume Vienna had a good reason to publish the dry recordings. They created the possiblilty to use them in all kinds of venues and ambiences. The more 'coloured' version of Synchron will probably be more limited in use in other venues.
But I'm not a specialist and certainly not a sound engineer and my opinion is merely personal. Up to now, I'm quite satisfied with my 'dry' libraries and the venues provided. It's hard enough to learn to master them...

Max

 

Hi Max,

Yes, it's all a matter of perference, and personal taste plays a big role in music. 

I recently purchased the Synchron Stage Vienna for MIR-Pro, RoomPack 6, and really loving how it sounds. There are quite a few parameters that I tend to edit to my personal taste in the MIR-Pro interface. I even edit the Room EQ to my taste. .. Taste.. Taste.. that's the keyword.  

I'm really excited to hear the new Synchron (Strings, Woodwinds, and Brass) whenever they become available, and have no doubt they will impress my ears.

Cheers,

Muziksculp