@William said:

I have never used the provided presets and matrices, even though they are expertly programmed, because my approach has been to start with ONE articulation: legato or sustain.  Then when working on the piece, realizing another is needed, say, a detache or staccato, or maybe a dynamic, then it is added.  But it is a cumulative, simple approach based on one's own music that can be used. 

This is very interesting. Since I do work as it seems quite the opposite way with very, very large presets programmed by myself providing nearly all the Superpackage has for a certain instrument. Which allows me to keep articulationswitching for all my projects the same way while I still am free to chose for every single note exactly the patch that fits best for a certain musical situation.

Isn't it very timeconsuming if you (instead of organizing once a general system, which let you find all you might need in all presets for all instrumeents in the same way) always start with just "one" single patch and than always create your VI-Matrix for each instrument for each recording completly new while programing the music? Isn't it more and more confusing, if you assign for each new patch you decide to make use of,  a new Keyswitch or Midi-CC-Value . I fear at least for me that would be the case.

It is still great that VSLhitherto -allows to establish very different approaches to work with the vast ampount of available patches. Nevertheless I am very curious for the Synchronplayer which seem to streamline the organisation of available articulation and seem to reduces "articlationswitching" what will bring for both of us presumably another new way to work with VSL-Samples.

How ever from what ever differetn point of view there is always enough to consent your appreciation for the great Work VSL has already done.

You do some very good work Steffen and I understand what you are saying.  I have tried to use a minimalist approach and don't like to have articulations that I am not using.  Oddly enough it helps me to think about exactly how the musical line is going to be performed in the most basic way.  Sometimes I find that a single articulation can play an entire line.   It is time consuming but I have developed empty presets that I place articulations in which makes it easier.  Also I have been using a specific order of keyswitches which is somewhat arbitrary, but I have gotten used to it so it makes the recording/performance process easier.   

Also, and this is tied in with a basic way the VSL library is constructed, one can "build" the musical performance using this approach.  For example, a single line is played and sounds fairly good, but is lacking in "punch."  So one can then add in a single articulation like sforzando or even a light dynamic accent, and it adds just enough for the line to be played better.   This kind of thing is very natural  with VSL because of the way it bases everything on actual musical expressions/articulations, i.e. sostenuto, legato, fortepiano, etc.

@William said:

 

Also, and this is tied in with a basic way the VSL library is constructed, one can "build" the musical performance using this approach.  For example, a single line is played and sounds fairly good, but is lacking in "punch."  So one can then add in a single articulation like sforzando or even a light dynamic accent, and it adds just enough for the line to be played better.   This kind of thing is very natural  with VSL because of the way it bases everything on actual musical expressions/articulations, i.e. sostenuto, legato, fortepiano, etc.

I use VSL exactly the same way William.

That's interesting to hear Wayne.  I'm not saying you have to do it like that, it is just an aspect of VSL that I like.  I think it comes from the fact that I first started using VSL with the First Edition for Gigastudio, when it didn't even have any Vienna Instruments/Ensemble.  At that time I was doing a separate track for each articulation, which was an insanely complicated nightmare especially with Gigastudio crashing about every ten minutes. With the development of the VSL-dedicated software interface VI/VE all those could be placed on one track exactly like a single musician or group, which was a huge improvement and much more musical, with the software emulating what the composer and conductor do. 

That is what VSL has focused on especially with MIR which creates the virtual stages and instruments as multiple sound sources and only one or two microphone positions.  That is the REVERSE of what ALtiverb did - which was multiple mic positions and only one sound source!  Exactly the opposite of what is needed for an orchestral performance. I remember at the time thinking vaguely (not being an engineer) "this is wrong - you need multiple sources and only one mic, not the other way around - hmm...."   And then MIR did exactly that!  And VSL has continued with the thoughtful and amazingly innovative approach of figuring out what is actually needed musically.  

I never thought of MIR vs Altiverb like that William, but it makes perfect sense. 

I use Cubase and prefer one track per each instrument or string section. So I use the Cubase expression maps feature to switch articulations. I gradually developed my own expression maps, then standardized them among all of the instruments and string sections. I did have to make some compromises here and there, but it makes working with VSL instruments make more sense for the way my brain works.

Like yourself I have tried other libraries and keep coming back to VSL for the same reasons that you mentioned. I have high hopes for the new Synchron Strings I, but I sure hope we do not loose the consistency and the flexibility we now have with the existing libraries.

Both methods are good, I guess it depends on what works best for you, and if you are composing or doing mockups, 2 different worlds, but I think what's most important here is knowing your library, it's worth the extra effort I think. Composers cannot write 100% of what they would like using virtual tools despite the amazing progress we are seeing, they must adapt to the tools, so the better you are familiar with your tools the more enjoyable the process will be. I like to work like William, I'll quickly scan the articulations but having a good idea already what's there. I also don't want to be cluttered with tons of patches I won't be using in the piece, especially when you have a large number of tracks. I'm still learning from all the libraries. I've improved over the years mainly because I use the libraies more efficiently. If ever I were to make a tutorial video, I would force students to create melodies with a minimum number of patches, it's more effort and time, but the result is worth it.

"If ever I were to make a tutorial video"...

Please DO 😉 , and more than one !!

@Another User said:

If ever I were to make a tutorial video, I would force students to create melodies with a minimum number of patches, it's more effort and time, but the result is worth it.

If ever anyone would ask me, I would not force anyone to anything, but ask him, for his own musical intention, what he wants to do. and than try to help him to streamline his setup and demand him to follow as much as possiblke what his musical idea wants him to do. imho all in music is about realising musical Ideas/intentions and the only reasonable help is to help being as consequent as possible in that.

The discussion is very interesting in so far, we all (as far we will enter the VSL-Synchronstage universe) will be forced to redesign our personal approach very fundamently in very much aspects. Let us there fore try the same discussion maybe in a year or two when all synchronlibraries are released and we all might had done already some projects with. I'll be at least very curious how our discussion will be than.

"I'm still learning from all the libraries. I've improved over the years mainly because I use the libraies more efficiently. If ever I were to make a tutorial video, I would force students to create melodies with a minimum number of patches, it's more effort and time, but the result is worth it." - Guy Bacos

It is interesting how one of the most masterful and creative composers using VSL still says he learns from the library, which is a testament to the virtuosic musicians who recorded the samples.  A composer can always learn from hearing great performances, which is after all how Mahler, perhaps the greatest orchestrator of all time, learned by hearing as a renowned conductor all of the intimate details of orchestral performance up close.  One can do something very similar with VSL in being able to hear the sound of instrumental combinations and articulations with the most extreme detail and precision.  

@William said:

....says he learns from the library, which is a testament to the virtuosic musicians who recorded the samples.

That is true, the depth of a library is so important. And I do mean it when saying, I could be using the same VSL samples, and in 5 years create better demos simply because of using them more efficiently.

But like anybody else, I get very excited when new lib comes out. 😛

"I would make the more decisive difference in respect to the average size of your projects. You do not need care that much about efficiancy, as far you scarcly programm pieces longer than 2-3 minutes excerps and scarcly program larger ochestras or ensembles. But If ever you programmed some 20-30 minutes and larger orchestral music I would suppose, that it is not so much the question, who composed it..." -fahl5

Even though i tried to create a positive thread in response to the ridiculous negative crap on this Forum, this is a weird, dismissive statement about Guy Bacos music that I cannot let pass.  Fahl5 does not seem to understand that actually composing a piece of music is vastly different from merely performing one the way Fahl5 does.  A performer can do no more than recreate - at best - what a composer actually created before.  A performer is doing maybe 1/1000th of what a composer does.  It is hard as hell to create a piece of music out of nothing - it is totally simple, comparitively, to merely perform one that already exists.  

When one considers that not only does Bacos compose originally, but also perform and then mix these pieces -  it is mind-blowing.  Also - the statement 2-3 minutes in a dismissive, "oh that's simple" way - it is insulting.  You don't know what you are talking about Fahl5.  Bacos created incredible pieces like the Triple Concerto and Mourning piece for cello and orchestra that are long, complex compositions on a Rachmininoff level.  It is wrong for a performer to dismiss this fantastic actual creation of new music by an actual composer.  I am tired of being put down in the same way -  as if composing is worth less than the mere attempted reproduction that performers do.  

And now since saying what I actually feel will trash this thread I need to say I don't care what the response is and won't be reading it.  It is useless to create these posts on the internet. 

OK that is William as we know him.

Obviously it is possible that there are different opinions as well as there are different kinds of taste, ambitions, courage and severity in music. It is not worth to dispute that nor to become emotional about that.

To me it seems to demonstrate a serious lack of appreciation for the great Work of VSL to contaminate the VSL-Forum again and again with that kind of offtopic, and emotional personal harangue. Better let me hear your large scaled work than post useless statements like that. Otherwise we all must think, you simply are not able to, since if you were able to, you  probably would have better things to do than posting like that.😉

In respect for the great Job of VSL I am not interested to participate or prolong that in any way.

I 'know' what I am talking about and there is absolutly nothing wrong with it.

(BTW.: I would not recommend anyone to do anything in music what appears him to be "hard" to do in anyway. How should anyone like anything if even youself did not just enjoyed it to do. That is the miracle of inspiration. Good things are good and not "hard" in anyway. No great composer nor any interpret would ever been able to produce any remarkable amount of music if this would have been "hard" for him and not just his natural way to think and  language to speak.)

I want to ask _everybody_ to stay calm and polite during this discussion.

Thank you.

Well, getting back on track hopefully.

I agree with Guy that there is a limitation to ones' imagination using VI's, but if there is one company that tries to make things better for us it is VSL thanks to their exhaustive approach to articulation.

I was curious to read Williams' approach as it is different to mine. I compose on m/s and each line is articulated at conception so when I come to programme, I, like Fahl have everything to hand which suits me (having 128Gb ram helps too:-). Having said that, I do see the benefits of programming with one source but in my case, I use the crappiest piano in my DAW and then automate/articulate once I have recorded the part in. I am a pianist too and so this makes sense to me, I also try not to quantize too much and to get over latency, a sharp attack is very useful.

I have to disagree with Fahls' reliance on inspiration though. For me, composing is not necessarily easy and inspiration is hard won by work - as I see it, one needs to create the environment for inspiration to enter and that is done with due diligence. Even then there is no guarantee inspiration will show up, but hard work and an open mind, ready to go where it might be led, are essential (as is a bit of luck).

I don't believe in such a thing as a work inspired from start to finish, just as there is no real agreement on what inspiration is, nor indeed what moments in a piece are inspired - a composer may be proud of where a particular harmony led to, but a listener might not view that as particularly inspiring! Most composers will admit to some routine work in their pieces, of that I am sure.

I write music and I create recordings of works by other composers. The approaches are different due to being creative on one end and trying to be true to the composer's intent on the other end.

If a work has a lot of legato passages, I might just start by using the legato patches of the various instruments. If the work requires more articulations, I will create each instrument set-up with about four to five slots for different articulations (using Vienna Ensemble). An important thing to consider is the string section you are working with: Not all Violin sections are going to work with a given line. Sometimes, the chamber violins work well, other times it will be orchestral violins. I was working on a symphony and the opening melody of the third movement sounded wonderful with the large violin ensemble. My hope is that the upcoming string section will help fill in some gaps with my compositions. My second piano conerto might really benefit from the use of the new strings.

I am very greatful that VSL is consistent with their provided articulations. I always want more!!

@mh-7635 said:

 

Well, getting back on track hopefully.

I agree with Guy that there is a limitation to ones' imagination using VI's, but if there is one company that tries to make things better for us it is VSL thanks to their exhaustive approach to articulation.

I was curious to read Williams' approach as it is different to mine. I compose on m/s and each line is articulated at conception so when I come to programme, I, like Fahl have everything to hand which suits me (having 128Gb ram helps too😊. Having said that, I do see the benefits of programming with one source but in my case, I use the crappiest piano in my DAW and then automate/articulate once I have recorded the part in. I am a pianist too and so this makes sense to me, I also try not to quantize too much and to get over latency, a sharp attack is very useful.

I have to disagree with Fahls' reliance on inspiration though. For me, composing is not necessarily easy and inspiration is hard won by work - as I see it, one needs to create the environment for inspiration to enter and that is done with due diligence. Even then there is no guarantee inspiration will show up, but hard work and an open mind, ready to go where it might be led, are essential (as is a bit of luck).

I don't believe in such a thing as a work inspired from start to finish, just as there is no real agreement on what inspiration is, nor indeed what moments in a piece are inspired - a composer may be proud of where a particular harmony led to, but a listener might not view that as particularly inspiring! Most composers will admit to some routine work in their pieces, of that I am sure.

Good points.

And to elaborate on what I was saying, and to be sure there's no confusion, just like in anything we do that has a minimum of depth, whether it's arts, sports or chess, you have to go to school first, whether it's through an establisment, private, or picked it up here and there, from the streets etc  it's still going to school, and during that time you are forced or force yourself to do things a certain way, simply because your mind is not use to think like this, so this becomes a huge asset in the end. You do not ask the person, what would you like to learn or what are you feeling today? Learning does not interfere at all with ones imagination and inspiration to be creative, just gives him more techniques to work with and express himself, but does require efforts to begin with. And regarding VSL, the point is, that certain exercises on how to connect the various articulations and beyond would be highly benificial, especially to the less experimented who wished to refine themselves. So I would tell a student for example, here is a melody, you must use these articulations to make it more expressive. That is the idea, to make it more musical and give him new ways to approach programming, and first thing you know, this all becomes natural to you and effortless. Of course, to each his own, and nothing wrong with doing it any other ways, maybe there are better approaches, but seems this makes sense to me.

William, your works are very much appreciated and that's all that counts. Complexity should NOT be a criteria for great music. I have little esteem for some composers with highly complex approaches. 

I wanted to share my novice experience on why and how I switched to VSL. I used to dabble with sound libraries in the early 2000's, during the days of 'soundfonts' and 'giga studio'. While most sample libraries made great quality samples, the one thing that was lacking was classical performance capability. Being a novice amateur composer myself, I couldnt take these libraries seriously beyond a point, as I didnt see how they could ever match the quality of a live performance. When you played a serious of staccto for example, the loudness will not be even. And legato was approximate...etc., I was mainly interested in classical music, and many of these liraries had 'canned' sounds that were suitable for film scores or pop music, but classical music demands a higher level of detail which they didnt have.

I knew about VSL then but it was too pricey for me at that time,

And then in 2015, after years of giving up on virtual samples, I happened to listen to a Beethoven string quartet demo on the VSL website. I was simply blown away. I ordered the samples and was blown away again when I played them. The legato was  amazing and the performance samples with repetition....And then there was the Sibelius integration which was phenomenal, and the organization of the VSL website was fantastic. 

While I am not as advanced as other users here like William and Guy, I feel that the key to me about VSL is organization organization organization.

No other library will allow me to put together a legato with staccato or pizzicato samples in the same musical phrase and make it sound like it was make in my room by one player at one time. VSL seems to have taken tremendous care in making sure that different articulations blend to give the appearance of a single performance. Without this aspect I dont see the point of sample libraries. This is more critical for classical music than other kinds of music. 

Best

Anand