@Sagi said:
The workshop in sound&recording about garritan&vienna instruments was written for an easy approach to the complexity of Vienna instruments: the author wanted to explain the principles of building simple matrices without overextending the interested reader.
The workshop was not for super-experts with undiscussible knowledge of taste [8-)]
Would be more interesting to read, what in the demo was not good in your opinion, than to play the Pro-Composer in Internetforums, who is not reliant on writing reviews.
Try to do it better and post it.
a musical moron
Hi Sagi
First of all: Keep calm my dear. [[;)]]
A demo (like in Sound&Recording 7.2006) should show - even if it is a simple example - a product from its best side. In this magzine was a test about the vienna chamber strings and one about the Garritan Stradivari. It was given a hint to listen to track 7 in both of the tests (magazin's CD).
When I listen to this track - especially to Garritan's Stradivari - and I know nothing about sampled instruments my comment would be: "Wait another 10 years until the technique is some steps farther...". In other words:
The magazine tested two products and showed them with one or two sample-articulations. This is not fair in my opinion. Unfortunately I don't own the Garritan Stradivari but I believe this instrument could have a more natural sound. A real violin sounds with every note in another way. This means that the sample user has to simulate this matter too... Magazines suggest "
we know it" so I am of the opinion that they should give their best... and sorry - I'm not happy with the demo's solo.
Here are two soloviolin-examples which shall show what I mean with "simulate the naturalness of instruments" by changing sample-articulations.
Example 1 (VI-Solo Strings > Violin, Cello, PMI Baroque Organ)
Example 2 (SopSax is real)
Vienna Chamberstrings and Garritan's StradivariAll the best
Beat Kaufmann