@Nick Batzdorf said:

I think a lot of very capable composers who have written reviews might be surprised to hear that. [[;)]]

...and a lot of reviewers who gave up composing might have no idea what we're talking about!! [:P]

Robert Schumann was a great composer who wrote a lot of reviews. I'm not aware that he wrote for any technology magazines, however. I think Batzdorf may be unique in this regard.

Robert Schumann is a great example of composer reviewer. Good call.

Schumann was also better than I am. If only he hadn't died 100 years before i was born. I'd certainly ask him to write for us.

@Nick Batzdorf said:

Schumann was also better than I am. If only he hadn't died 100 years before i was born. I'd certainly ask him to write for us.

Nick,
You could always use a 'ghost' writer.........

[H]

yeah, for whatever reason, writing words can put food on the table while writing music, in many cases, can't...

@mathis said:

I'm sorry, but this demo quality has nothing to do with the used libraries. The author obviously is a musical moron.

To save the author's soul...
I believe that most of the authors of magazines don't have the time to get the knowledge they should have to work out the qualities of such complex PlugIns. Further they are not musicians perhaps but "only" technical experts... and by the end of the month they should have finished their work (even if they have or not) because the customers want to buy the magazin.

So the question is: Why on earth don't they use official demos?
Heaven only knows [8-)]

Beat

There are plenty of "official demos" that shouldn't be as well. I've come accross many demo's that made me cringe and think that the demo did more harm to the image of the lib than good.

@Beat Kaufmann said:

No comment from my side...

Have fun
Beat Kaufmann

But, I hear you notwithstanding...

Those who *can* will compose. Those who *can't* will write reviews. Always the case.

Ouch JWL, that hurt..... composing is the day job, I review for the chance to do something a bit different...... [*-)]

12 years of composing, 10 of writing and counting..................

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

@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 Stradivari

All the best
Beat Kaufmann

Compared to several arrogant postings here, i'm calm.

It is obvious that the examples you posted sound much better, but they are not programmed with simple matrices.
And i think there is more work in it than one or two days.
The workshops task was to show a beginner what he should try first, before he uses big setups.
The example for experts with much more technical effort wil be released in one of the next issues.
The solo could have a little bit more of "esprit", i concede. But you are much more limited with articulations on the stradivari.

Its not pedagogicaly clever to begin a workshop about a new product with very complicated tricks, so be patient.

@Sagi said:

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.

I did it...

And I'm looking foreward to the next Sound&Recording numbers

Beat Kaufmann