Thanks for your advice.  Right now, I use VI with MirPro and the Synchron Stage setting when mixing with my Synchron libraries.  Completing Cube would actually be much less expensive for me, including supplementing with a few Big Bang titles I am interested in.

As Dewdman says, it's much a matter of preference.

I'm currently using both. But I'm also moving my VI/Cube libraries to Synchron, because of some additional things found in the new player.

At the same time, for some of the older libraries I would first purchase the VI version, and then upgrade to the Synchronized one, because there are some precious articulations that can only be found in the older version. This is not including Dimension Strings and Brass, that should have the same content in both versions.

EDIT: With the recent releases and additions, Woodwinds and Solo Strings are also complete in their Synchronized version. Left out are many articulations from Chamber and Appassionata Strings. Missing are the VI Brass apart for Dimension. Keyboards, Plucks and Elements Percussions are empowered in the Synchronized version.

I'm testing the Synchron libraries with classical music. what I seem to understand, up to now, is that they work great with pieces needing a big sound. Theater music, for example. I've not yet tried with smaller setups, and this will involve checking the close and mid mics in MIR Pro, and see if they behave as well as the VI versions.

Paolo

@PaoloT said:

EDIT: With the recent releases and additions, Woodwinds and Solo Strings are also complete in their Synchronized version.

Unfortunately, this isn't the case...

Solo Strings are *almost* intact.  The only thing missing (as far as I'm aware) is Violin II and Cello II fast reps with the ability to cut releases.  Violin I's fast legato is also screwed up somehow - it sounds permanently phase-y compared to the VI version.

The SYN-zed Woodwinds leave a lot to be desired.  This is extremely unfortunate, because BY FAR the biggest perk of the SYN-zed Woodwinds is the addition of Timbre Adjust.  It handily fixes the problem of phasing velocity layers in solo instruments, which almost all the woodwinds are!  

The problem is that we gain Timbre Adjust, but we lose so much of what makes the VI libs "best in class":

The most glaring omission are the various legato types.  The main legatos of SYN WW are actually the janky-sounding perf_leg_looped patches from the VI version, originally meant to be tacked on to the END of a phrase, not used for the whole thing (hence why it's found in the Resources folder for the VI version.)  Sure, there are more velocity layers, but these velocity layers are just the four velocity layers from the sustain patch attached to the looped legato patch.  

Another glaring omission is that there is no actual perf-legato_fast patch.  Instead, it's a truncated version of the looped legato auxiliary patch.  What makes this even more awkward is that there's also no dedicated perf_trill patch - instead, it's integrated into the "Fast" articulation, which means if I want to use the perf_trill patch, I have to switch to "Fast" (which doesn't sound as good as the missing "pure" fast version) and hope I'm playing the right speed for the hidden perf_trill to occur.

Core SYN WW is also missing perf_grace (I was told that was integrated, but I could not for the life of me figure out how to trigger it when comparing it side-by-side with the VI version) and perf-marcato_fast.  The result is significantly LESS options for legato than before.

Core SYN WW is also missing an entire English Horn, and the perf-legato_lyrical from the Piccolo.

The single woodwind packs add perf_grace back into the mix, but that's about it.  All of the SYN-zed WW are missing half of the perf_rep patches, either the slow or fast versions.

It's frustrating because the biggest strength of the VI Woodwinds is their incredible legato patches, but their biggest weakness is the obviousness of the velocity layer Xfades, esp. in the legato patches!  The biggest strength of the SYN WW is that Timbre Adjust handily fixes that, but it's biggest (and completely avoidable weakness) is that it ditches a lot of articulations, many of which are fundamental to why the libraries are worth buying in the first place.  

Volume balancing is also very strange.  Flute II is extremely quiet compared to Flute I, and the French Oboe is incredibly loud compared to everything else.

The SYN-zed Woodwinds are the only VSL libraries I've returned.  I genuinely don't understand the rationale behind some of the above omissions.  If the SYN WW were simply a 1:1 port of articulations from VI into SYN, then it would be ideal: all the great sounding flexibility of the VI version with the wonder that is Timbre Adjust, well worth the price of admission.  At present, however, it feels stitched together and bafflingly incomplete.  If Dimensions Strings and Brass can remain fully intact, why can't Woodwinds?

VSL, if you're reading this, please consider following the example you set with SYN Dimension Strings and Brass.  If you want your customers to switch over to SYN completely (and charge them crossgrade prices for it), it makes all the sense in the world to make the SYN-zed versions a superior option. At the moment, the only libraries this makes sense for are the Dimension libraries and Solo Strings; everything else is at best a trade-off and at worst a downgrade.

Alternatively, adding Timbre Adjust to VIPro would be amazing.  Wishful thinking, but just throwing it out there.

EDIT: I forgot to add another perk of SYN - the volume-dependent release samples that trigger with dynamics patches.  These are great polishes to the libraries.  On that note, it would be fantastic if the SYN-zed Woodwinds incorporated the "Multi-Shorts" functionality from the SYN-zed Solo Strings.  However, if I had to choose between that or actually including all the articulations and original flexibility from the VI versions, I'd choose the latter in a heartbeat.

I'd recommend to get the Vienna Libraries along with the much cheaper upgrade/sidegrade to Synchronised Libraries. You can keep the licenses for both (at least this was the case with Konzerthaus Organ), and I hope that I can convert them both to iLok licences later on.

I definitely don't want to miss out on the dry sound option from the Silent Stage.

@Seventh Sam said:

Alternatively, adding Timbre Adjust to VIPro would be amazing.  Wishful thinking, but just throwing it out there.

I second this wholeheartedly.

@Seventh Sam said:

The most glaring omission are the various legato types.  The main legatos of SYN WW are actually the janky-sounding perf_leg_looped patches from the VI version

Since the non-looped version is also supplied, you can simply drag & drop the one at the place of the other. Not yet tried with the woodwinds, but for solo strings pieces not requiring long notes, or where you can split long notes into separate bows, it works great.

Paolo

Sam, thanks so much! I'm obliged to you for your meticulous comparisons, especially in the case of WW - by far the most useful comparison I've seen to date.

Right now I'm seeking advice while mulling whether to buy the VI Solo Strings bundle in the sale, or else bide my time until the next Synchron sale and forgo the VI version forever.

Though it would be more expensive for me to go the VI route now and crossgrade later, uppermost in my mind is the still matchless quality of VI Solo Strings.

But there's also the question of 'driveability' of VI versus Synchron libraries. It's a leap in the dark for me because I've no experience of driving VI Pro in the highly intricate and often high-speed 'slalom'-type circumstances of programming solo instruments. I'm therefore extremely curious to know - from anyone in a position to help on this - whether the VI Pro or the Synchron Player has any relative advantages or disadvantages in programming demanding solo parts - most especially in the case of solo string parts.

I'm not a MIR user (my apologies to Dietz), so that's not a factor in my decision.

@PaoloT said:

Since the non-looped version is also supplied, you can simply drag & drop the one at the place of the other. Not yet tried with the woodwinds, but for solo strings pieces not requiring long notes, or where you can split long notes into separate bows, it works great.

Paolo

I know how to re-assign patches in the SYN player, Paolo.  I have tried the SYN-zed Woodwinds: you indeed can do what you just laid out, and it does work just fine.

Here's what you can't do (let's use Flute I as an example):

• Access the perf_trill patch independently.  Instead, you have to rely on the player's detection algorithm and work around it.  In the VI version, you can do it either way.
• Access the unlooped, "pure" perf-legato_fast patch, because it isn't there.
• Access the perf-marcato_fast patch, because it isn't there.
• Access the perf-grace patch, because it isn't there.
• Access one of the perf_rep legato patches, because it isn't there.
• Access one of the perf_rep staccato patches, because it isn't there.
• Access one of the perf_rep portato patches, because it isn't there.

I think you get the point.  The SYN-zed Woodwinds lose functionality when compared to the VI versions.  Not just that, but core functionality: those articulations and the ability to access them individually allow the library to be much more expressive and flexible, which is especially important for solo instruments (like woodwinds!)

For brand new VSL customers, the SYN-zed Woodwinds are a much, much more affordable option than buying the VI woodwinds.  To get comparable functionality:

VI Pro + MirX Synchron + WW Bundle (VI, full) = 1230 euros
SYN-zed Woodwinds = 445 euros
Note: I'm not factoring in sale prices here

This is GREAT for new VSL customers, and I'd be remiss not to praise that.  But I'm not talking about new customers, I'm talking about crossgrading/upgrading and the price around that.  It makes zero sense for an upgrade or crossgrade to take functionality away.  Why would someone pay money to lose something?

One might say, "Well, the functionality added is the impulse response, not necessarily the articulations."  

MirX Synchron is (outside of sale price) 95 euros.  Add VI Pro to that, and it's 150.  SYN-zed WW are 445.  95/150 euros is a LOT less than 445 just to add spatialization.

One might also say, "Well, what if someone owns only one or two VI woodwinds, and wants a cheaper upgrade to the whole instrument family?"

That's a great point.  On the surface, it seems to make more financial sense to do so.

But this gets to the heart of the matter.  Questions like the OP - "Which should I get, VI or SYN-zed?" - keep popping up.  If VSL wants people to migrate to the Synchron Player, then the answer should always be SYN-zed.  But it's absolutely not.  Instead, the SYN-zed libraries are maddeningly inconsistent in their offerings.  This results in confusion, disappointment, and - from a business perspective - loss of customers and revenue (in the long run).

Let's take Flute I as an example again.  An owner of Flute I may indeed choose to upgrade to SYN-zed WW and thus get the whole instrument family for a vastly reduced price than if they were to go the full VI route.  However, they lose all of what I just elaborated on at the beginning of this post.  So they get their brand new, shiny SYN-zed WW, open it up, and find out that their SYN-zed Flute I is a compromised, stripped down version of their VI Flute I.  They were lead to believe - from all the marketing - that SYN-zed WW are superior to VI.  But they're not.  At best, they're a trade-off. 

Compare this to VI Dimension versus SYN-zed Dimension.  The SYN-zed Dimension are indeed superior to the VI Dimension, because they're the same exact library, just with the added benefits of the Synchron Player and Impulse Responses!  Sure, we miss out on the paper-rustling sounds, but those are nowhere near the same value as entire perf interval patches.  If the marketing around SYN-zed libraries is to be believed, this should be the case with ALL SYN-zed libraries.

A more egregious example would be in the strings department.  An existing owner of the VI Appassionata I library (Full) will have to pay 125 euros for the crossgrade.  According to the website, this is a library that "offers a wide variety of articulations".  That's just not true; the library ditches so much of the original material from Appassionata I yet costs 125 for the crossgrade OR a whopping 415 euros (for brand new customers) for...legato with vibrato control.  You can get the standard library of Synchron Strings Pro for 30 euros more and get a truly comprehensive and vastly superior string library. 

If the marketing stated, "This is a library that's meant as a layering tool for Synchron products", then it would be honest.  It still wouldn't be worth 415 euros, but at least customers would know what to expect and wouldn't have to go digging to avoid any "hidden disappointments".  One could say the library is can be viewed as an *expansion* to the original Appassionata.  But it's not an expansion because it's in an entirely separate sample player!  If it was an expansion, then the non-vibrato articulations would also be added to the VI versions of the libraries.  Instead, it's - you guessed it - a trade-off, and not a sensible one at that.

So what's the purpose of SYN-zed libraries?  Are they a more compact, stripped down version of VI libraries meant for those on a budget?  Are they layering tools for Synchron products?  Are they upgrades from their VI counterparts?  At the moment, different libraries have different practical applications, but they're all marketed and priced as upgrades from the VI counterparts, which doesn't line up with reality.  They're definitely not expansions, as they're in an entirely separate player.

I don't mean to be pointlessly negative: I would very much like all of them to be genuine upgrades from their VI counterparts, which is why I'm bothering to type all this in the first place.  I hope that the folks at VSL read what I have to say and take it to heart.  Like I said before, if SYN-zed WW were indeed the VI Woodwinds - articulation for articulation - but with the added functionality of Synchron (release technology, Timbre Adjust, etc.), I would happily pay all the crossgrade prices, because Timbre Adjust is that amazing!  Alternatively, if that's not an option, I would like to know - clear as day - when the libraries are not upgrades but instead meant to be auxiliaries to Synchron products so it's crystal clear what I'm getting for my money.  I'm going to go out on a limb and bet that other customers feel the same way. 

@Macker said:

Sam, thanks so much! I'm obliged to you for your meticulous comparisons, especially in the case of WW - by far the most useful comparison I've seen to date.

Right now I'm seeking advice while mulling whether to buy the VI Solo Strings bundle in the sale, or else bide my time until the next Synchron sale and forgo the VI version forever.

Though it would be more expensive for me to go the VI route now and crossgrade later, uppermost in my mind is the still matchless quality of VI Solo Strings.

But there's also the question of 'driveability' of VI versus Synchron libraries. It's a leap in the dark for me because I've no experience of driving VI Pro in the highly intricate and often high-speed 'slalom'-type circumstances of programming solo instruments. I'm therefore extremely curious to know - from anyone in a position to help on this - whether the VI Pro or the Synchron Player has any relative advantages or disadvantages in programming demanding solo parts - most especially in the case of solo string parts.

Macker,

You're welcome!  I'm glad my observations are useful 😊

My personal experience with the VI Solo Strings VS SYN-zed Solo Strings:

The SYN-zed Solo Strings are - next to the SYN-zed Dimension Libraries and perhaps the SYN-zed Appassionata and Chamber Sordino - the only SYN-zed libraries I would actually consider a real upgrade/expansion compared to a stripped down layering tool, and therefore worth the price.  Here's why:

• You get Violin II and Cello II, which is MUCH more value than the VI bundle (not factoring in sale prices, of course).  You can do a traditional string quartet without having to pitch-duplicate Violin I or discount-wrangle to get Violin II.  
• The library turns the perf_rep articulations into "multi-shorts", which exponentially increases the amount of short articulations you have available (which is incredibly useful in solo strings, as you can imagine!)  What this feature does is detect whether you're in the middle of a phrase or at the beginning of one, and adjust the round-robins accordingly.  In a semi-recent project, I used this feature extensively and was able to create phrases that combined arpeggios with repeated notes without having to switch between perf_rep and staccato/spiccato patches.  Out of curiousity, I tried to replicate this just using the VI version and it wasn't possible.
• The scaling release sample feature lets you inject pre-recorded dynamic patches in the middle of phrases without that abrupt cut-off from the dynamic sample.  Such a small detail, but it allows for so much!
• With a slight exception (elaborated below), the library includes EVERY SINGLE ARTICULATION from the VI versions.  Huge thumbs up!
• As with all SYN-zed libraries, you can turn off the impulse response and use it like the dry VI version.  In fact, every time I've used them I've done this!

There are a few tiny quibbles: Violin II and Cello II's fast_rep patches don't include cut release versions, and the fast legato patches for at least Violin I sound somewhat phase-y to me (although that might be my ears playing tricks on me).  But, in comparison to the above points, these are absolutely not deal-breakers for me.

Re: drive-ability

I use REAPER and an articulation management script for it that works very, very easily and smoothly, so from my POV the libraries have the exact same workflow: set up some keyswitches, program the script accordingly, and go to town with what is essentially REAPER's version of expression mapping. 

Therefore, I have no idea whether or not one is more easily programmed than another outside of my particular set-up.  If I had to guess, I would say they're both the same, as they both use keyswitches and controllers to switch articulations, and both are easily configured and set-up to your particular taste. 

Synchron Player's "Dimension" structure makes it easier to create "playing modes" since it remembers where you are in a particular category of selection, but I'm sure you already know this.  It's worth mentioning, though, since strings (and their huge amount of playing styles) are probably the kinds of libraries that make the most use of this kind of functionality.

Synchron Player is a bit buggier and prone to hiccups than VIPro for me (unless it's loaded up in Vienna Ensemble, in which case they both behave equally nicely.)  I'd bet money this is particular to my computer, however (it's 7 years old).

In short: other than the few quibbles I mentioned, I can't see how SYN-zed Solo Strings is in any way a downgrade from VI Solo Strings, and I can see many ways in which it's an upgrade.

Hope that helps!

the Synch'd WW have things the VI doesn't at all and likely is missing some things. It's two different products. 

the way I approach this is with MIR Pro 24, so I run out of slots there but having many Synchron Player libraries mixes quite well with Synchron in MIR, with also the option of MIRacle or one of the enhancements of Hybrid Reverb. In fact the Synchron products have an enveloping quality in the surround or surround-to-stereo that MIR doesn't, so for me best ot two worlds.

@circlingkailas said:

Hi everyone - quick question and I appreciate your opinions.  I'm about 50% of the way to complete my set of VI Symphonic Cube - just need to add woodwinds and brass.  This has been over a number of years, plus adding individual VI instruments (clarinets, sax) as I needed them.  Now comes along Synchron and Big Bang.  With a limited budget (I also have a complete set of EastWest libraries, as well as The Orchestra Complete but am not planning to drop 5K+) - should I continue adding to the VI Cube series, or make the switch over to Synchron or Big Bang?  I know there are considerable differences in sample and recording techniques used.

I am leaning to just completing the VI Cube, and adding some Big Bang libraries.

Thanks!

Hi,

I would not buy VI in general anymore. The reasons are obvious and do not have to be explained. Synchron is the future ... VI is ... „still there“ 😊 ... 

The only thing which is really missing ... a SY Player Pro ...

(... with hopefully a better Time Stretch-Performance. Literally NO ONE is able to manage bigger Projekts with this Time Stretch CPU-Killer. First I thought it was me or my computer. But the Library Testers on YouTube (With the latest PCs and Macs) are unhappy too.)

@Seventh Sam said:

Alternatively, adding Timbre Adjust to VIPro would be amazing.  Wishful thinking, but just throwing it out there.

Hello Sam,

actually "timbre control" is available in VI pro when using Articulate Presets:

There is even "3D control", which allows you to control up to 3 sound parameters simultaneously via continuous controllers (e.g. attack, vibrato and section size). And there are no omissions/restrictions: all articulations included in the full VI libraries (e.g. various short and long note variations, legato variations, dynamics, phrases, APP Sequencer matrices, ...) are instantly accessible. In addition to the obvious advantage that you can conveniently use any MIRx venue instead of merely the Synchron Stage, they use other unique features that only VI pro offers, like the convenient auto-divisi for Dimension libraries. 

All orchestral VI libraries are supported, so if you are interested simply download the demo and check it out.

Sam, many thanks again - really good of you to provide so many considerations. It's all increased the agony for me, lol, but I welcome that. For me it's well worth agonising over this Solo Strings decision, and I couldn't have done it as thoroughly without your detailed contribution.

And guess what? I'm minded to go for the VI Solo Strings bundle.

This bundle (the only VI candidate I've been considering) includes Sordino, Violin II and Cello II. In short, the way I'm looking at it now, relative to Syz Solo Strings: -

  •   I'd gain Sordino; cut release in Fast-Rep for Violin II and Cello II; and clean Fast-Legato patches for Violin I;

  •   I'd lose multi-shorts; the scaling release sample feature; Dimension tree features; and Timbre Adjust.

When I first considered relative prices I totally forgot that Syz Solo Strings doesn't have Sordino! So now, guessing a list price for Syz Solo Strings II (all the Sordino articulations ported across - assuming VSL chooses to do it eventually), the VI route no longer seems the more expensive option in my case. Also, crossgrading to Syz later probably still wouldn't disfigure the monetary sense of going VI now.

Above all, the clincher for me was that I didn't want to risk going Syz and be left without Sordino for ages or maybe forever, and facing that dreadful "no sensible way back" feeling in view of VSL's one-way discount policy for crossgrading. (I've tried and tried, but haven't yet found a truly satisfactory way of simulating Sordino.)

Circlingkailas, so sorry to have hijacked a big chunk of your thread on things you've not asked about. Alas, good advice can at times be very scarce in this forum, and on this particular topic of VI versus Synchron / Synchronized there's been a veritable famine! And so one just has to dive in opportunistically when diamonds like Seventh Sam pop in and post treasure! Hope his comments are also helping you with your concerns about woodwind and brass.

I'd add this. What's emerging here is that it's really a matter of considering 'alternative' libraries on a case-by-case basis now, despite that seemingly golden opportunity of reaching for the whole Cube. In short, it was always complicated; today it's very complicated. No blame; I believe it's just the nature of what we're all asking technology to do for music-making.

@Macker said:

When I first considered relative prices I totally forgot that Syz Solo Strings doesn't have Sordino! So, guessing a list price for Syz Solo Strings II (all the Sordino articulations ported across - assuming VSL chooses to do it eventually), the VI route no longer seems the more expensive option in my case.

Above all, the clincher for me was that I didn't want to risk going Syz and be left without Sordino for ages or maybe forever, and facing that dreadful "no sensible way back" feeling in view of VSL's one-way crossgrade discount policy. (I've tried and tried, but haven't yet found a truly satisfactory way of simulating Sordino.)

And I totally forgot the VI Solo Strings Bundle includes Violin II and Cello II.  Given the current sale , I think everything you're saying makes perfect sense!  Given the pattern of VSL's releases, it's pretty likely that SYN-zed Solo Strings Sordino will come along at some point.  Take that with a grain of salt, though; I don't work for VSL nor do I have any insider information.  I'm just a groundling 😊  

@symphonic riot said:

Hello Sam,

actually "timbre control" is available in VI pro when using Articulate Presets:

Unfortunately, it's not.  I'm specifically talking about "Timbre Adjust", which is a feature VSL recently introduced to the Synchron Player (coinciding with the release of Synchron Brass).  It's a proprietary intelligent filter control that behaves like a multiband expression fader, scaling different frequency ranges at different intensities (or maybe there's something else going on under the hood...?).  The result is a CC the pros of both Expression and Filter into one control, and (on woodwinds and brass), it sounds quite convincing.  Alongside VelXF, it can be used to "massage" through the VelXF layers to mask the phase-y shift that can occur, esp. in solo instruments.  Hence, why I think it's so useful for solo woodwinds!  At this point, only the Synchron Player has this feature.

That said, those articulate presets look mighty interesting!  I'll definitely take a look, thanks!

@LAJ said:

(... with hopefully a better Time Stretch-Performance. Literally NO ONE is able to manage bigger Projekts with this Time Stretch CPU-Killer. First I thought it was me or my computer. But the Library Testers on YouTube (With the latest PCs and Macs) are unhappy too.)

Yes, the Stretch Factor function just about lights my computer on fire the minute I activate it.  Glad to know I'm not the only one!

@symphonic riot said:

Hello Sam,

actually "timbre control" is available in VI pro when using Articulate Presets:

Unfortunately, it's not.  I'm specifically talking about "Timbre Adjust", which is a feature VSL recently introduced to the Synchron Player (coinciding with the release of Synchron Brass).  It's a proprietary intelligent filter control that behaves like a multiband expression fader, scaling different frequency ranges at different intensities (or maybe there's something else going on under the hood...?).  The result is a CC the pros of both Expression and Filter into one control, and (on woodwinds and brass), it sounds quite convincing.  Alongside VelXF, it can be used to "massage" through the VelXF layers to mask the phase-y shift that can occur, esp. in solo instruments.  Hence, why I think it's so useful for solo woodwinds!  At this point, only the Synchron Player has this feature.

That said, those articulate presets look mighty interesting!  I'll definitely take a look, thanks!

Oh sorry, I completely overlooked this new feature in the Synchron Player so far. This sound indeed very nice and I have to check out how this works. Thanks so much for the explanation!