@herb said:

Regarding Appassionata Strings it's simple not possible to offer more full string patches, because there are no more articulation in the double basses available.

For the Orchestral Strings more option would be possible, maybe we can offer an update in the future.
But the subject of this topic are full range patches of the Appassionatas, or did I miss the point?

I believe Jerome's suggestion was directly about the Appassionatas, but this issue really goes way beyond that. It's really about the other strings as well. I for one would love to see more options for the Ocrhestral Strings.

Anything that you can offer up in the way of full range would be great Herb. If it's not possible with the Appassionatas to have all, then do what you can, and maybe even if possible offer some Vls,Vas,Vcs with out the bass. The more we have to work the easier it is for us to use in our sketch work.
Thanks.

P.s - I just bought the Apassionatas online. I look forward to putting them to work.

Maybe I should clarify my own post - I dont argue the suggestion of having more full string patches (where possible as Herb has pointed out). The only objection here from me and I believe others as well, was the manner, and the timing in which the original post was delivered.

Miklos
(not from Africa - a Hungarian from Australia!)

I will admit i'm still a bit mysitified by the need to have more articulations in full string patches. As i understand the original, and frankly, negative tone of the original post, the complaint was about the lack of an entirely extensive range of articulations in a full string patch for 'quickly' knocking up an arrangement.

It would seem to be somewhat of a paradox, to have a large range of articulations when one is 'speeding' along inputting. It wasn't that long ago that we were making do with legato and staccato (with the odd tremolo and pizz) to do the rough draft, and then going to work on a more detailed improvement, including replacement with more suitable articulations for a finished product.

To have more would slow down the drafting process, wouldn't it?
And doesn't that defeat the purpose of full string patches entirely?

Seems a rather strange way to work, but i guess, everyone to their own.


Alex.

@mpower88 said:

Maybe I should clarify my own post - I dont argue the suggestion of having more full string patches (where possible as Herb has pointed out). The only objection here from me and I believe others as well, was the manner, and the timing in which the original post was delivered.

Miklos
(not from Africa - a Hungarian from Australia!)

I have a friend named Miklos that is in the same buisness.
Point taken.

@hermitage59 said:

... but i guess, everyone to their own.


Alex.

I think this statement gets closest to the heart of the matter, from what I can tell.

Still, I appreciate reading everyone's thoughts on this.

@hermitage59 said:

I will admit i'm still a bit mysitified by the need to have more articulations in full string patches. To have more would slow down the drafting process, wouldn't it?
And doesn't that defeat the purpose of full string patches entirely?

Seems a rather strange way to work, but i guess, everyone to their own.


Alex.

Yes, we all work differently. I'll try to shed some more light on the subject.
For me, I would say that the need for full range approach is more about the process of writing and less about orchestration. If I've already written the music on piano, or it's in my head as the case may be, then you are correct. It would be better to go directly into orchestration. Also, if given the time, I'll do it differently.
But, when I'm handed a picture and have sixteen hours to complete the score (as I frequently have to do with a TV series I score) or I happen to have a full feature movie and they want the entire score in 3 weeks (which I just had happen to me) I have to write the music on the spot and get it to the director quickly so he can sign off on the score before I get into detailed orchestration, recording live or whatever the final score is to be.
In the old days, I geuss they gathered around the piano and that was how it was done. For me, I put up rough sketches with the right feel and tonality, and many times, with more than one choice. It's about time management and not wasting time on orchestrating something that won't be used. Then, and only when's I'm given the green light, I get into really orchestrating the score.

Anway, you asked, so I tried to explain. And now, I've already spent more time on this thread than I probably should have and I must get back to work.
I hope you all enjoy the passion strings. I'm sure I will.

This is so incredibly arrogant I had to comment, though I would prefer this thread lapse into its deserved obscurity. You are too busy and important and in-demand to spend any time on your music?

I hope that never happens to me.

o.K., I am out of here, as this hypocritical thread, by hypocritical people who are making money off of music done with VSL and then trashing it, has started to BORE me... go on with your recitations of why you are important and the not-even-released-yet string library is not good enough for you... [8-)]

@William said:

This is so incredibly arrogant I had to comment, though I would prefer this thread lapse into its deserved obscurity. You are too busy and important and in-demand to spend any time on your music?

This has nothiing to do with arrogance: it's his job. As for many, many of us who are using VSL's products.

J.

I guess that what we learn from all this is that everyone has a different workflow. I cannot imagine ever plonking down chords on a "string" patch, any more than I would want a woodwind patch or brass patch (although I know people who do use the latter...!). For me I always think in at least 5 voices for the string section (assuming that it is a conventional setup), so a string patch wouldn't save me any time at all in programming. I also think that AS is probably the worst choice of Collection for a busked string section, as it is far to fat and woolly (from what I've heard) to be of much use.

I think that all I'm trying to say is that we all have different ways of working that suit us, and whilst I can see uses for a general string patch (check out Atmosphere for pads), it doesn't make sense to me to have one for much of AS.

DG

So this "free Appassionata violin" preview I keep reading about -- was that a special promotion for Pro Edition VSL owners? Or would I be eligible once I finish purchasing the full extended VI cube?

Just asking,
Peter

The one thing that concerned me was the scarcity of articulations for the basses... will these ever be increased?
One of the things I've always admired in VSL is the thoroughness of the sampling - I was a bit surprised when I saw that the basses don't even have a performance legato patch! [:O]

I think it is a cost and time issue related to the initial reason behind the samples.

The history of the Appassionata Strings is that they were originally a single session to provide additional violin samples as a "present" to existing VSL users of certain products. Requests were asked for and out of this the violin samples emerged.

It was pretty obvious from the request responses that there was a wish for a certain type of sound and later these requests this spilled over into the other string groupings. I guess VSL responded to this and thought it a good idea to provide this requested sound across the whole string section as an extra library.

This may be why there aren't the depth of articulations that exist in the main string library which makes sense from both a cost and duplication of product reason.

Julian

@William said:

This is so incredibly arrogant I had to comment, though I would prefer this thread lapse into its deserved obscurity. You are too busy and important and in-demand to spend any time on your music?

I hope that never happens to me.

o.K., I am out of here, as this hypocritical thread, by hypocritical people who are making money off of music done with VSL and then trashing it, has started to BORE me... go on with your recitations of why you are important and the not-even-released-yet string library is not good enough for you... [8-)]

Wow...I'm just about speechless. Excuse me? You want to talk about arrogant? Who are you to judge my workflow? Do you hear me bashing your workflow?
I posted because some didn't seem to understand why a full range would be neccessary. I tried to explain it's importance to me. I didn't post so I would irritate the incredible rightousness known herein as "William".

And my post is just so damn offensive that it made you pull your hair out and you had come back and personally bash me because..... Grow up. Learn some manners. Take an anger mangement class.

Maybe you should stop attacking others when you don't agree (I seem to recall that you have a long history of doing this in these forums) Better yet, if it pisses you off, don't post. If you can't be civil, don't post. Otherwise you're the one that comes off as arrogant and obnoxious.

@Another User said:

you will get an armed response

hahaha

I'm going to steal that line.

(but I haven't tried tha A. strings and can't contribute anything intelligent to this thread)

... and then there's that Dietmar. Always coming in and whining about "let's be nice to each other"...

Nasty piece of work.

[[:|]]

Group hug.