The Synchron Player is a backward step compared to VI Pro. I hope they don't evenutally retire the latter. Ater the Synchron Strings debacle, I decided that I had my share of the "Synchron" experience. But I still love my classic VSL libraries. I hope they don't ruin them by eventually giving them the Chamber Strings treatment and abandoning VI Pro in the long run.

@JimmyHellfire said:

The Synchron Player is a backward step compared to VI Pro. I hope they don't evenutally retire the latter. Ater the Synchron Strings debacle, I decided that I had my share of the "Synchron" experience. But I still love my classic VSL libraries. I hope they don't ruin them by eventually giving them the Chamber Strings treatment and abandoning VI Pro in the long run.

The Synchron Player ( and likewise the SynchronSerie) is of course far from bneing a "debacle" there is not a single audible proof for that. It is simply "new" And everybody who is used to something, tends to hate everything new which is going to replace it, since that always demands to learn to handle what is new. 

The Synchron Strings are (notably if you really compare them with the more than 10 Years old Orchestral Cube Strings which is the only thing they are going to replace when the Synchronstrings will be accomplished in all its Volumes) in many aspects a huge step forward and the Synchron Player when it comes to streamline the usage while at the same time  expand its power and versatility is definitly an ingenius quantum leap in the technology of Orchestra-sample-players - but you are right it is of course different to what you are used to . So let us be patient with all who grumble, be sure in a few years no one will seriously prefer VI over Synchron-Player and Series any more. 😉

@JimmyHellfire said:

The Synchron Player is a backward step compared to VI Pro. I hope they don't evenutally retire the latter. Ater the Synchron Strings debacle, I decided that I had my share of the "Synchron" experience. But I still love my classic VSL libraries. I hope they don't ruin them by eventually giving them the Chamber Strings treatment and abandoning VI Pro in the long run.

The Synchron Player ( and likewise the SynchronSerie) is of course far from bneing a "debacle" there is not a single audible proof for that. It is simply "new" And everybody who is used to something, tends to hate everything new which is going to replace it, since that always demands to learn to handle what is new. 

The Synchron Strings are (notably if you really compare them with the more than 10 Years old Orchestral Cube Strings which is the only thing they are going to replace when the Synchronstrings will be accomplished in all its Volumes) in many aspects a huge step forward and the Synchron Player when it comes to streamline the usage while at the same time  expand its power and versatility is definitly an ingenius quantum leap in the technology of Orchestra-sample-players - but you are right it is of course different to what you are used to . So let us be patient with all who grumble, be sure in a few years no one will seriously prefer VI over Synchron-Player and Series any more. 😉

I'm sure we've been here before, fahl5 ...

@JimmyHellfire said:

I'm sure we've been here before, fahl5 ...

I gave you just an answer which seem to me reasonable and worth to be given 😃

@kamil said:

Thank you fatis12. That is mean the old library (VI) it is better, (in term of general use). And the synchron string I library is a backward step. Because they (i.e. VSL) limit of how to use it. Simply I can not use the synchron library with different room in Mir Pro, only with synchron stage room. I hope I can explain my opinion with my humble language, however I wish I was wrong. Kind regards Yasir

Well, we must be carefull when we talk about rating "better" or "worse":

for instance your point is pretty clear: if you want to be free of placing the instruments around on stage, and get very different ambience, of course this task is easier and more effective with VI and MIR Pro.

Synchron is designed to always use Synchorn stage acoustic: but they are very flexible acoustics, in perfect line with the practice of orchestral recording for Media production scoring (e.g. movies, TV, videogames etc.). To make them flexible they use multi-mic approach and digital reverb instead of Convolution Impulse repsonses.

The result is a more realistic depth because the early refelctions are very wet and real, always better than simulated virtual reflections. Anyway it's a matter of taste, and I agree that the flexibility of VI + MIR Pro is an unmatched value.

The SYNCHRONIZED products can be used in the very same way of the VI series, from a MIR Pro compatibility point of view, by the way. The limitations are for SYNCHRON series only.

Other people here talk about different aspects (e.g. Synchron player advantage and limitations) and again is a matter of opinions and practice: Synchron Player is very powerful and does lot of interesting things, and SYNCHRONIZED version of Chamber Strings is providing several nice features (e.g. consistency of dynamics, and some performance of repetitions improved in a single patch) but of course the VI Pro has a lot more features non existing yet in Synchron player (e.g. humanization, sequencer matrix, multy patch playback, and lot more).

@ddunn said:

I don't agree that the Synchronized Chamber is a "backward step"

Others have said that there are fewer articulations which isn't the case.  They simply have been incorperated into

other patches.  There are now 2nd violins (instead of using the transposition trick).  Not to mention the new dimension capabilities of the Synchron player. 

I wrote a review and explained in more details, and I didn't talk about step-back. I wrote it's a no brainer at 75€ and a great companion of Synchron Strings I, then we agree.

Actually Kamil was also referring to Synchron series and not to Synchronized.

About the incorporated articulations, sometime it helps (e.g. repetitions) sometime it doesn't (e.g. espressivo vib.).

Anyway I'm not sure about 2nd Violins being free from artifacts if you don't use the IR and you play in unison... I hope they edited samples velocity to avoid unison of same samples, but I didn't find a reference yet on this. Did you?

@bbelius said:

Hello Paul,

I have some questions about the Synchronized Chamber Strings (please correct me if I got something wrong):

1. If understood correctly, Syn. Cham. Strings are re-edited dry samples + matching IR.
   a) The IR is ony stereo and so the output is only stereo
   b) No (control for) different IR mic-positions like with the other Syn. products

2. I have the Chamber Strings and MIR Pro + Synchron Room-Pack. The main advantages if I upgrade are
   a) access to the new synchron player
   b) re-masterd samples and more velocity layers
   c) any other advantages?

3. Are there any plans to provide jsut the reworked samples as update to the Chamber Strings Library?

Could you please post a link to the manual?

Thank you!

Best, Ben

Hi Paul,

these questions are still unanswered for me.
Could you please answer at least some of them?
Thanks!

Best, Ben

Hi Ben,

Sorry about that. Here you go:

1. If understood correctly, Syn. Cham. Strings are re-edited dry samples + matching IR.
a) The IR is ony stereo and so the output is only stereo
=> Correct

b) No (control for) different IR mic-positions like with the other Syn. products
=> Correct.

2. I have the Chamber Strings and MIR Pro + Synchron Room-Pack. The main advantages if I upgrade are
a) access to the new synchron player
b) re-masterd samples and more velocity layers
c) any other advantages?
=> Compatibility with Synchron Strings I in preset structure and velocity mapping.

3. Are there any plans to provide jsut the reworked samples as update to the Chamber Strings Library?
=> No.

EDIT: the manual should be available to all users right here.

Best,
Paul

@ddunn said:

I can't wait till Dimension Strings receive this treatment, although the huge sample set make it an altogether

larger task.  

I should like this very much, but I think, this only would work very well, if humanization is implemented in the Synchron Player. One of the things that gives the dimension strings the very lively performance, is that you can give every player his own little imperfections, just as in the real world. 

Thank you, Paul!

Yes, absolutely!!  Especially the tuning.  It's one of the most important things that contribute to realism.  Wish I had a second set!  

Thanks again VSL.  I feel lucky that there is a company in my lifetime willing to take on these sampling experiments.  

@kamil said:

Thank you fatis12. That is mean the old library (VI) it is better, (in term of general use). And the synchron string I library is a backward step. Because they (i.e. VSL) limit of how to use it. Simply I can not use the synchron library with different room in Mir Pro, only with synchron stage room. I hope I can explain my opinion with my humble language, however I wish I was wrong. Kind regards Yasir

@ddunn said:

Yes, absolutely!! Especially the tuning. It's one of the most important things that contribute to realism.

I must say that my enthusiasm over the recent Synchron products is, well, muted... no con sordinos which is a "must have" for me. Between that and the disappointing legato intervals in Synchron strings I am much more cautious and concerned about buying more of these products.

@strytten said:

I must say that my enthusiasm over the recent Synchron products is, well, muted... no con sordinos which is a "must have" for me. Between that and the disappointing legato intervals in Synchron strings I am much more cautious and concerned about buying more of these products.

Top be fair you should consider

a) VSL has been always the only Producer who provided a complete Set of muted articulations as Volume II of Chamber, Solo, Appassionata and Solostrings. So you cant judge the whole propject from just the first Volume

b) what the other Competitors provide is either just the Filtertrick (which you already can do now with Synmchron-Strings I by simply closing LPF12) or even worser they provide in general just one or two sordinio articulation making it nearly impossible to work musical reasonable with sordino passages which are anything else than just smooth stringchords,

In my humble opinion (after having already produced nearly an hour of ambnitious classical music with SyStr.) there is no real evidence for any substancial lack of legato, while it of course it may be that some people who didn't worked yet that seriously with that library might be the victime of their missing expierience to get out of it what they are looking for.

@fahl5 said:

In my humble opinion (after having already produced nearly an hour of ambnitious classical music with SyStr.) there is no real evidence for any substancial lack of legato, while it of course it may be that some people who didn't worked yet that seriously with that library might be the victime of their missing expierience to get out of it what they are looking for.

@fahl5 said:

In my humble opinion (after having already produced nearly an hour of ambnitious classical music with SyStr.) there is no real evidence for any substancial lack of legato, while it of course it may be that some people who didn't worked yet that seriously with that library might be the victime of their missing expierience to get out of it what they are looking for.

Maybe, but the SY-Chamber Strings can cover/mask the sound of SS1 if you do not like it.
I do not like the general sound of SS1 too - But I think that the SS1-sound can play a big role in the mix because of it's thickness and power. So, from a technical point of view the Synchrion Strings are still very usable in the mix. And VSL did the right thing with the SY Chamber Strings. 

(A different topic are muted Strings. It would not make sense to purchase a second Library which has to be covered by a VI-product. And espcially muted Strings are all about "beauty". I hope that VSL will catch the muted sound in a different way.)

@fahl5 said:

In my humble opinion (after having already produced nearly an hour of ambnitious classical music with SyStr.) there is no real evidence for any substancial lack of legato, while it of course it may be that some people who didn't worked yet that seriously with that library might be the victime of their missing expierience to get out of it what they are looking for.

Who of those who crab as if they had no other Job, does know exactly what he is talking about? What exactly have they done before judging that harsh?

I know that you can get pretty nice Legato out of this Library. If you dont, I fear you just havn't tried seriouisly. 

However it is of course not the only Library in the last time "who has received" in the Forum you named (or let us better say was victime of) excessive harsh and emotionalised critics. I can show you even worser "critics" of the new Hollywood Choir, meanwhile it is still one of the best wordbuilding Choir on the market and of course still better than his already market leading predecessor. The VI-Guys didn't care much about and ranted as if they got payed for. The Hans Zimmer Strings likewise got  on other Sites likewise tons of fierce reactions as if it were not the product of music to discuss, but a battle of hatespeech to win.

Sorry I do not count that much on those who seem to prefer to troll around instead of just practically try to explore what you can achieve.

And no, it is in no way "bigot" to execrate such kind of "discussions" as harsh as poor of real substance. No one has really any benefit from that. Sometimes it is a quite telltale sign just to look how long and how much those posters have been active here or whereever. I at least know quite well what I am talking about. Thats why those who dont really doesn't impress me that much.

Thank you fahl5, I appreciate your comments. As with most things in life, we all win if we can stay positive. As for con sordinos, hopefully Vienna will deliver additional packages. As for legato, are you willing to share what you're doing to get a good legato sound? (or if you've already done that, provide a link?)

Thanks!

If anyone have had the chance to listen all the 30 minutes of my Tschaikowsky Serenade op.48 there you can find  already a couple of very different examples of low, slow, fast, slur. large singing etc. Legatos included always in its certain original musical context.

What i can hear there is imho far from justifying any of those extreme lamentations about the alleged Legato Problem. Moreover I wonder if any other exsisting Library would provide such a versatile variety of reasonable Legatotyps. Presumably there is no other Library at all on the m,arket which would be ready to cope that well with the extremly brilliant and manifold demands of that wonderful composition. (If I am wrong I am pretty interested to hear the better example.  Come on happy hypercritics, dont be lazy, just show what you are abkle to😉.)

However the "downside" I see (especially for those who dont spend the time for getting familiar with) is:

All those many options give always the chance to chose the wrong one. And yes I also would not yet pretend to master every single option up to its most ideal usage. But before lamenting, I see there is enough I can do to explore what is under the hood of this vast Library. (this is at least less boring 😛)