# Samplemodeling Solo & Ensemble Strings Released



## David Cuny

https://www.samplemodeling.com/en/products_strings.php (Samplemodeling Solo &amp; Ensemble Strings) have been released.

The retail price is 399 EUR, with a time-limited 10% discount for existing SampleModeling customers.

Has anyone had a chance to try them out yet?

I've been saving up for this, and https://www.samplemodeling.com/en/demos_strings.php (the demos) sound nice (as expected).  Most of the demos seem to focus on the sections, although there are several solo demos as well.

Mostly, I'm curious how well the work with a breath controller, since that's my main use case. (Yes, there's demo of this online).

I'm also curious how the parameters can be adjusted - the SM instruments sound lovely, but they generally have less options than the AM instruments.


----------



## Vardaro

Gorgeous sound, but I should like some drier demos..
The Paganini is perfect. The fast détache in the Vivaldi as well.
The Tchaikovsky is "soupy", with wa-wa phrasing and too-soft fingers in the legato (I don't mean "portamento"!) but the vibrato seems to start at the note onset which is is rare.


----------



## Garry

Been waiting a long time for this, and wow, those demos sound amazing. To my ears, this is as close to the real thing as I care about. Incredible. Credit to SampleModeling also for releasing MIDI files for 2 of the demos. 

I may well be a customer for this - I own their other products and highly recommend them. However, please SampleModeling, we need to see more than just demos from you. These are highly processed, and whilst they show off what this can do in expert hands, I want to get more of a sense of what it will do in my, much less accomplished hands! For that, we need a video walkthrough of the software: take us through each of the instruments and ensembles one by one, and let us see how the software handles the myriad parameters you have painstakingly incorporated. Hopefully, the videos are soon to be released, now that the software is available? 

But congratulations - from what we can see/hear so far, this is exactly what many of us would have hoped you would have produced.


----------



## ProfoundSilence

I'm just not hearing it.

I suppose if you compare it only to SWAM it has a more usable out of the box sound for ensemble. I held out for more demos but none grab me


----------



## Saxer

I had the opportunity for beta testing. Here's a dryer example. Fun stuff: short and long notes without any key switches and just two controllers (dynamic and vibrato intensity).


----------



## CT

Hmm... I *want* to get on board with the SM/AM approach. I'm still not, though. Maybe eventually!


----------



## robgb

Saxer said:


> I had the opportunity for beta testing. Here's a dryer example. Fun stuff: short and long notes without any key switches and just two controllers (dynamic and vibrato intensity).



It's funny, but none of the demos on the site impressed me. I went in wanting to like them, but came away feeling underwhelmed. BUT I have to say this sample sounds wonderful. Do they have this up on the site? because they really need to add it if they don't.


----------



## Garry

Saxer said:


> I had the opportunity for beta testing. Here's a dryer example. Fun stuff: short and long notes without any key switches and just two controllers (dynamic and vibrato intensity).



That is really beautiful and convincing.

I've been waiting for this, as I just want/need a single strings ensemble, so wanted to compare with my other contender, SCS. I know many will say they're too different and are for different purposes, but for me, I just want a single library that covers the (limited) type of strings ensemble timbre I'm after. When SCS next goes on sale, they'll be similar priced, so not sure at this point which to go for, but your demo strongly pushes me in this direction, as I just love the playability of the SM/AM approach.


----------



## I like music

robgb said:


> It's funny, but none of the demos on the site impressed me. I went in wanting to like them, but came away feeling underwhelmed. BUT I have to say this sample sounds wonderful. Do they have this up on the site? because they really need to add it if they don't.



I liked the Tchaikovsky Violin Concerto demo. I thought the violin gave a really really great expressive performance ... something that I felt was a tad missing from the ensemble sound.


----------



## Fa

I also did deep beta testing and several demos. The classical music demos are not heavily processed: they are the dry sound positioned with MIR Pro 24 Synchron stage venue, and nothing else.

I’m also available to share dry examples if you like. Just contact me.


----------



## Garry

robgb said:


> It's funny, but none of the demos on the site impressed me. I went in wanting to like them, but came away feeling underwhelmed.


 Funny how we hear things so differently - I know you're not a fan of Albion One, but for me, it's my favorite library! Neither of us incorrect, just you have your ears, and I hear through mine!



robgb said:


> BUT I have to say this sample sounds wonderful. Do they have this up on the site? because they really need to add it if they don't.


 Agree completely with you on that!


----------



## chapbot

Went to hear the demos, not impressed. Then came here and heard Saxer's demo and am now interested again LOL. We gotta hear dry, unprocessed demos!!


----------



## leon chevalier

chapbot said:


> Went to hear the demos, not impressed. Then came here and heard Saxer's demo and am now interested again LOL. We gotta hear dry, unprocessed demos!!


Same here, I'm a huge sm brass fan, but the demos did not work on me either. Then the @Saxer demo gave me exactly what I was expecting from this lib. So I'll wait for more user demos.


----------



## leon chevalier

The first sound from the video sound like a 90's midi string rompler... so weird...


----------



## Vardaro

Can we vary the vibrato on the solo instruments?


----------



## I like music

Vardaro said:


> Can we vary the vibrato on the solo instruments?



I would be very very surprised if it didn't. @Fa I'm assuming there's intensity as well as speed control over vibrato?


----------



## Vardaro

It's not mentioned onthe SM site..


----------



## mojamusic

leon chevalier said:


> The first sound from the video sound like a 90's midi string rompler... so weird...



That was my impression on hearing the first demo. Watching


----------



## Fa

I like music said:


> I would be very very surprised if it didn't. @Fa I'm assuming there's intensity as well as speed control over vibrato?


Of course. As you say it’s a must for solos in the SM style. And less obvious is that in the ensemble, orchestral vibrato is also modulated with expressive vibrato ( more synchronized and deep) independent controller. That way you may play with vibrato amount cc1 vibrato rate cc19 and expressive vibrato cc99 and getting a very wide range of combinations in real time.


----------



## Fa

Vardaro said:


> It's not mentioned onthe SM site..


Probably it’s not very directly explained because it was a common feature of all the SM instruments, but yes it is mentioned in the section dedicated to the technology ( anechoic recording and dry samples modulation enables perfect dynamic and vibrato seamless management).


----------



## VivianaSings

I agree - Saxer's demo is more in line with what I expected to hear on the site. I know it's said that the demos there aren't overly processed yet they sounded too nebulous and "washed out" to me and I felt like the ensembles sounded too generic. Also agree - a bit like a rompler or like all the other string libraries. 

Saxer's demo has my ears perked up again. 

I'm not primarily a wind player but when possible I use a yamaha wind controller to enter stuff so I'm also curious about it's response with wind controllers. I have, and use SWAM and Sample Modeling horns / brass and love them, so I do have confidence in Sample Modeling to work well with a wind controller though.


----------



## pipedr

Saxer said:


> I had the opportunity for beta testing. Here's a dryer example. Fun stuff: short and long notes without any key switches and just two controllers (dynamic and vibrato intensity).




Sounds awesome!

Saxer, can you post your example showing the solo, small, and large section sound? Really curious about how they did that and what it sounds like compared to each other.


----------



## Fa

leon chevalier said:


> The first sound from the video sound like a 90's midi string rompler... so weird...


I feel guilty... it’s an unison in fortissimo, so maybe it was not a clever idea to have a fade in on it... BUT I have 2 comments:
- and the rest? I don’t think you may still describe it that way.
- I Made music in the 90s and had dreamed having any rompler sounding that way... but it was simply not existing. 😜


----------



## pmcrockett

Here's Saxer's example processed using an effects chain that's pretty similar to what I often use on other dry instruments. (Saxer, if you don't want me to post this, let me know and I'll take it down.)

I gotta say, I'm liking how this sounds.

For anyone wondering, the specific effects I'm using are (in order):
Waves TransX Multi (transient shaping to emphasize attacks on upper frequencies)
Type Writer X (stereo imager/reverb to slightly widen the stereo field and fuzz the sound up a bit)
Flux Spat (early reflections from projecting the sound upward)
EW Spaces 2 (reverb, Abravanel Violins-Celli FR TS 3.0s)
Zynaptiq Intensity (harmonic exciter/compressor, sort of -- brings out the character of the sound a bit)
Overloud Gem EQ550 (hardware modeled EQ)


----------



## Fa

I understand that, even if more often music is finally produced with ( sometime even excessive) pretty wet ambience, to valutate the sound of a new product people always look for dry and more textured sound.
Demos instead, were more obviously made with the ambience you should expect in usual productions or recordings of live performance. 
Anyway the demos still show different size, style, textures and expressions, but what maybe people still didn’t get is they are all just made with the very same single VI... that’s what SM brings different, you may create and modulate the sound at your will, rough or smooth, tiny or majestic, defined or blurred, whatever you want.


----------



## PerryD

I was honored to participate in the beta as well. I have a LOT of great string libraries but this will definitely find a place in my projects. I hate piecing together a phrase from shorts, longs, legato, etc. Today was my first chance to play the release version. I used two instances of kontakt here. One with the Violin ensemble and one with the Viola ensemble, played together in unison. This is definitely _not_ an edited "best example" video. It was real time playing, without keyswitches. More a test of playability. I find this library blends very well with Cinematic Studio Strings and Spitfire Chamber Strings. For lyrical lines, it is beautiful. So here is a short screen capture video, mistakes and all.


----------



## Vadium

demos on official site sounds for me as Edirol..


----------



## PerryD

By the way, I started with the "Dry Presets" and added Fabfilter Pro R reverb. I have to agree with a lot of people here. Saxer's demo is great!


----------



## Sam Reed

Hi everyone, 

Is there a way to read the manual before purchasing? If so, I couldn't find it; would appreciate if you could point me in the right direction. 

Also, to those who've been beta testers or who've already purchased, are there any "auto-divisi" features? I haven't seen this mentioned and just curious. 

Thanks!


----------



## novaburst

Finally, this is the direction I think we all been waiting for, especially for strings.

It will be interesting if this is the new foundation for sampling. 

Nice one


----------



## leon chevalier

Fa said:


> I feel guilty... it’s an unison in fortissimo, so maybe it was not a clever idea to have a fade in on it... BUT I have 2 comments:
> - and the rest? I don’t think you may still describe it that way.
> - I Made music in the 90s and had dreamed having any rompler sounding that way... but it was simply not existing. 😜


Hello Fa, don't feel guilty! Yes those attacks seems unrealistic to me but I should have been more fare and say that the end of the video sound a lot better. Sorry for that.

But I truly was expecting gold from SM. To me the brass are still one of the best VI ever produced. Maybe it is gold, but the first impression wasn't that great. Perhaps you guys should redo some of the demos ?

My feelings is that to fake the big orchestral sound you need to add delay and randomness between all instruments but the blurring that results isn't working for me. 

The smaller sized sections demos sound absolutely great. So I guess it will have the same profile than the brass, great for exposed line, a but less suitable for the "big romantic sound".

Maybe if it has been sold as a chamber strings library, all we could read here would have been love and praise. Anyway, I know I will end up buying it, it's just a matter of time ! 

Congrats!

Edit : I was there in the 90's too


----------



## TomaeusD

Maybe I'm being too picky, but so far Perry's demo sounds the most realistic. Perhaps it's because the viola ensemble in unison with violins helps blur things. I'm excited to hear more demos (especially of cello and double bass sections) - the playability and the fact that ensembles are ready to go are huge selling points.


----------



## axb312

Demos sound bad to me


----------



## Fa

Sam Reed said:


> Hi everyone,
> 
> Is there a way to read the manual before purchasing? If so, I couldn't find it; would appreciate if you could point me in the right direction.
> 
> Also, to those who've been beta testers or who've already purchased, are there any "auto-divisi" features? I haven't seen this mentioned and just curious.
> 
> Thanks!


Not sure about the manual, but I can answer specific questions if any. For instance sorry no autodivisi feature is implemented, but you may manage ensemble size in real time with a controller: to start a divisi phrase just send the appropriate downscaling command to get the right sound.


----------



## Fa

Vadium said:


> demos on official site sounds for me as Edirol..


I’m always curious when I read this type of comments, wondering if it’s a genuine and so disputable but respectable opinion, or it’s just an off-topic provocation. I want to take you seriously and hope you were honest: may you please let me know what Edirol product sounded like Paganini or Vivaldi demo? I will buy it now, even if 20 years old 😉


----------



## DANIELE

Saxer said:


> I had the opportunity for beta testing. Here's a dryer example. Fun stuff: short and long notes without any key switches and just two controllers (dynamic and vibrato intensity).




I take this message to ask someone that already hase the instrument if he/she could make a video walkthrough or something similar to show the library. Maybe showing how it behaves in various passages, like short spiccato notes rhythmic passages or slower ones etc...

Thank you.

I'll watch/listen to what is already posted here after work, thanks to all of you for testing and sharing your results.


----------



## novaburst

PerryD said:


> One with the Violin ensemble and one with the Viola ensemble, played together in unison.



I was wondering was you trying to make the sound thicker, or was you not happy with the violins played alone.


----------



## PerryD

novaburst said:


> I was wondering was you trying to make the sound thicker, or was you not happy with the violins played alone.


 I just liked the combination for lyrical ensemble lines. The Celli & Basses also sound good to me layered in the same way. Some string ensemble libraries are not entirely divided into 1st & 2nd Violins, Violas, Celli & Basses (this one is) but only offer "high and low" ensembles. This was just a quick way to emulate that. I suppose I could have added the 2nd Violins for extra thickness.


----------



## DANIELE

PerryD said:


> I just liked the combination for lyrical ensemble lines. The Celli & Basses also sound good to me layered in the same way. Some string ensemble libraries are not entirely divided into 1st & 2nd Violins, Violas, Celli & Basses (this one is) but only offer "high and low" ensembles. This was just a quick way to emulate that. I suppose I could have added the 2nd Violins for extra thickness.



Di you tried to layer the same patch multiple times? For example Violins 1 on Violins 1, I'm just curious how much could we expand the thickness of our virtual orchestra.


----------



## Fa

DANIELE said:


> Di you tried to layer the same patch multiple times? For example Violins 1 on Violins 1, I'm just curious how much could we expand the thickness of our virtual orchestra.


This is possible, but it's not requested, and perhaps even not recommended: what you get is a more "blurred" and confusing sound, instead of a thicker sound. But you can play Violins 1 and Violins 2 in unison, and get a big and loud Violins unison like in real life.


----------



## Sam Reed

Fa said:


> Not sure about the manual, but I can answer specific questions if any.



Thanks Fabio; I don't really have any specific questions. I just can't purchase right away (waiting on some payments to come in) and was hoping I could read the manual for fun. (Perhaps that sounds weird, but I have read the SM Brass manuals more than once, for fun.) And maybe even was hoping to get a jump on writing some expression maps, but those are never too involved with Samplemodeling's instruments.




Fa said:


> to start a divisi phrase just send the appropriate downscaling command to get the right sound.



Just to make sure I understand correctly, the setup is similar to SM Brass, i.e. intervals/chords must be one voice per channel?

Thanks again!


----------



## novaburst

PerryD said:


> just liked the combination for lyrical ensemble lines. The Celli & Basses also sound good t



It did sound very nice, and nice demo 

Thanks


----------



## PerryD

Sam Reed said:


> Thanks Fabio; I don't really have any specific questions. I just can't purchase right away (waiting on some payments to come in) and was hoping I could read the manual for fun. (Perhaps that sounds weird, but I have read the SM Brass manual more than once, for fun.) And maybe even was hoping to get a jump on writing some expression maps, but those are never too involved with Samplemodeling's instruments.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just to make sure I understand correctly, the setup is similar to SM Brass, i.e. intervals/chords must be one voice per channel?
> 
> Thanks again!


 Duophonic / double stops are possible.


----------



## decredis

Sam Reed said:


> Thanks Fabio; I don't really have any specific questions. I just can't purchase right away (waiting on some payments to come in) and was hoping I could read the manual for fun. (Perhaps that sounds weird, but I have read the SM Brass manual more than once, for fun.)


I think this is it: https://www.samplemodeling.com/en/files/USER_MANUAL_Solo_Ensemble_Strings.pdf The page title displayed in the browser for some reason is "The Trombone Manual" but the pdf document seems to be about the strings.


----------



## clisma

PerryD said:


> I was honored to participate in the beta as well. I have a LOT of great string libraries but this will definitely find a place in my projects. I hate piecing together a phrase from shorts, longs, legato, etc. Today was my first chance to play the release version. I used two instances of kontakt here. One with the Violin ensemble and one with the Viola ensemble, played together in unison. This is definitely _not_ an edited "best example" video. It was real time playing, without keyswitches. More a test of playability. I find this library blends very well with Cinematic Studio Strings and Spitfire Chamber Strings. For lyrical lines, it is beautiful. So here is a short screen capture video, mistakes and all.



Thank you for posting this! It sounds quite good to my ears. I assume you also did the realtime breath controller example on the SM site? It's the one that most captured my attention: overall, to me it seems this lacks a bit of that blur that comes from a section performing fast flowing lines together, which could be mitigated; the tone is not always most pleasant (although your suggestion of it pairing well with CSS makes perfect sense considering the darker tone of the latter); and I miss a bit of that rosin sound in the smaller section sound.

Like the SM brass though, it would seem that placing this in the right acoustical space makes a strong difference. Which brings me to your example: would you care to explain how you went about spacializing this?

Obviously, using a breath controller seems invaluable (I use one daily as well), but I'm thinking that space and excitement of the upper harmonics might be key to this. Really, I'm excited about the possibility of repeated intervals in flowing accompaniment finally being achieved (something string samples are woefully inept with, and something which this seems to have cracked quite masterfully, as exhibited by "Magic Little Flower" on the SM site, around the 50-second mark), but it's not enough to pull the trigger and spend time learning yet another string library.

Looking forward to more feedback from early users/beta testers, thanks!


----------



## Sam Reed

Thank you very much decredis! I appreciate it.


----------



## PerryD

clisma said:


> Thank you for posting this! It sounds quite good to my ears. I assume you also did the realtime breath controller example on the SM site? It's the one that most captured my attention: overall, to me it seems this lacks a bit of that blur that comes from a section performing fast flowing lines together, which could be mitigated; the tone is not always most pleasant (although your suggestion of it pairing well with CSS makes perfect sense considering the darker tone of the latter); and I miss a bit of that rosin sound in the smaller section sound.
> 
> Like the SM brass though, it would seem that placing this in the right acoustical space makes a strong difference. Which brings me to your example: would you care to explain how you went about spacializing this?
> 
> Obviously, using a breath controller seems invaluable (I use one daily as well), but I'm thinking that space and excitement of the upper harmonics might be key to this. Really, I'm excited about the possibility of repeated intervals in flowing accompaniment finally being achieved (something string samples are woefully inept with, and something which this seems to have cracked quite masterfully, as exhibited by "Magic Little Flower" on the SM site, around the 50-second mark), but it's not enough to pull the trigger and spend time learning yet another string library.
> 
> Looking forward to more feedback from early users/beta testers, thanks!


 I used the Dry unison ensemble presets and set up a simple FX send in Studio One with FabFilter Pro R reverb. "airy bright string chamber" medium hall preset. The clip on the SM site was mine from an early beta version.


----------



## Sam Reed

I must be going senile re: the manual :emoji_see_no_evil: ... I could've sworn it wasn't there when I looked, but it's right there plain as day.

Just in case the direct link decredis posted ever changes, this page should always link to the latest version: 

https://samplemodeling.com/en/downloads_strings.php
Now clearly it's time for me to grab more coffee :emoji_juggling:


----------



## TomaeusD

The more I listen to some of the demos, the more convinced I am that this will be a powerful tool to have. With proper reverb and placement I could see myself using this for runs and more intimate passages.


----------



## I like music

A lot of discussion on the ensemble product. I'm curious to see if more demos/examples come out for the solos...


----------



## givemenoughrope

Getting closer in terms or realism is a been factor of course but for me it’s really about expression. I’d like to hear it blend with SCS or 8dio strings too; not just to beef them up but to make them more expressive and fill in the gaps of each.


----------



## robgb

pmcrockett said:


> I gotta say, I'm liking how this sounds.


While I can appreciate the effort, I like Saxer's drier version better. But then I'm partial to the close studio sound versus the hall sound.


----------



## Fa

Sam Reed said:


> Thanks Fabio; I don't really have any specific questions. I just can't purchase right away (waiting on some payments to come in) and was hoping I could read the manual for fun. (Perhaps that sounds weird, but I have read the SM Brass manuals more than once, for fun.) And maybe even was hoping to get a jump on writing some expression maps, but those are never too involved with Samplemodeling's instruments.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just to make sure I understand correctly, the setup is similar to SM Brass, i.e. intervals/chords must be one voice per channel?
> 
> Thanks again!



Not so weird, it’s intelligent in my opinion 😉 but maybe not so common.

Yes it is, if you play mono, but strings have also a “poly” ks. That way you may write chords in the track and play them in double stop tutti or divisi at your will, using cc95 for downscaling or not.


----------



## Fa

givemenoughrope said:


> Getting closer in terms or realism is a been factor of course but for me it’s really about expression. I’d like to hear it blend with SCS or 8dio strings too; not just to beef them up but to make them more expressive and fill in the gaps of each.


I did it with VSL with fantastic results but VSL is dry so it’s easy task. Mixing with any dry library is very effective, maybe more problematic with wet libraries of course.


----------



## Vardaro

Just been reading through the manual. SM seems ro have thought of everything!
In particular the slight, momentary pitch distortions due to bow pressure, which (to my ears) is completely missing from the SWAM strings: added bow noise is not enough. 
I should like to hear more solo demos before buying, though..


----------



## I like music

Vardaro said:


> Just been reading through the manual. SM seems ro have thought of everything!
> In particular the slight, momentary pitch distortions due to bow pressure, which (to my ears) is completely missing from the SWAM strings: added bow noise is not enough.
> I should like to hear more solo demos before buying, though..



Aye, want to hear more of the solo stuff too...


----------



## muk

For what it's worth, to my ears the official demos sound bad. Especially the classical demos. I don't think that it was a good idea to release those. It is very difficult to make a decent mockup of classical music with the tools we have today. And these demos show that in my opinion. In no way do I hear that the library is up to the task. I don't want to step on anybody's toes. I'm sure the pieces have been chosen carefully and were mockuped with a lot of thought and skill. But to my ears, it just didn't work out.

The only demo I actually like is the unofficial one by @Saxer. This one is really excellent. It shows what the library is capable of musically. But even there I don't like the timbre of the strings. They sound dark and muffled to me.

As much as I admire Sample Modelings brass libraries, as much I dislike these strings.


----------



## mikeh-375

I too didn't like the classical demos @muk.


----------



## Vardaro

mikeh-375 said:


> I too didn't like the classical demos @muk.


They are squelchy! However, fast staccato and fingered legato seem more realistic than in most libraries


----------



## Fa

muk said:


> For what it's worth, to my ears the official demos sound bad. Especially the classical demos. I don't think that it was a good idea to release those. It is very difficult to make a decent mockup of classical music with the tools we have today. And these demos show that in my opinion. In no way do I hear that the library is up to the task. I don't want to step on anybody's toes. I'm sure the pieces have been chosen carefully and were mockuped with a lot of thought and skill. But to my ears, it just didn't work out.
> 
> The only demo I actually like is the unofficial one by @Saxer. This one is really excellent. It shows what the library is capable of musically. But even there I don't like the timbre of the strings. They sound dark and muffled to me.
> 
> As much as I admire Sample Modelings brass libraries, as much I dislike these strings.



I'm sorry that you, as others, don't like them. I'm also conscious of the limits, obviously. But I would like to get your attention to the following point:

- if you want to fool people with fake music that you can't compare with any real example, it's like offering just nice rendering of 3D avatars, and pretend they represent reality of human body. It's a bit different if you show a 3D avatar picture and you compare to the real life picture of the model you were imitating.

- so the purpose of classical music is honesty: you may quickly get if there is an improvement in getting closer to real sound, because you may compare it with the real stuff.

I agree that making real music with digital libraries is challenging, but in my very humble opinion the only honest way to show your progress is offering something that you may compare with reality, and you may try to replicate yourself with your favorite tools, because the score is public domain: just pick your favorite library and do it better, to get if the new product is worth of interest.

It's curious that you consider valid an example that Saxer defined very basic, being using just a fraction of what the library can do, and you don't appreciate any of the large set of articulations, variations, and expressions that were depicted in the other demos you deprecated.

Of course others had different opinions and that's the answer to all our questions: the personal opinion is formed on the very personal target and benchmark everybody has. 

I hope you will at least appreciate the brave honesty of showing the library on the worse, and most challenging field, instead of the usual clichè comfort zone of unreal soundtracks only.


----------



## muk

@Fa I do appreciate demos of classical music. If nothing else it makes comparing libraires easier (if other developers have demos of the same or a similar piece), and shows the limits of a library. And i know the hard and long work that goes into creating such mockups. It is just that in my opinion realism is entirely not the strong foot of this library. Musicality and maybe playability, yes. But realism? I don't hear it in any of the demos. You and the people from Sample Modeling seem to hear it entirely differently, and that's completely fine by me.


----------



## Vardaro

Not liking the some of the classical demos on the site does not mean I am not very near buying this library!


----------



## TomaeusD

I enjoyed the rendition of Adagio for Strings and the work put into Paganini's Capriccio no.1 is very impressive. I'm curious now about how the ensemble strings handle glissandi/portamento in particular.


----------



## germancomponist

Fa said:


> I also did deep beta testing and several demos. The classical music demos are not heavily processed: they are the dry sound positioned with MIR Pro 24 Synchron stage venue, and nothing else.
> 
> I’m also available to share dry examples if you like. Just contact me.


I think what people do not like is the sound of MIR PRO 24. 

So I would like to listen to all these demos without using MIR Pro 24, but using an analog reverb etc. Saxer showed how the strings can sound without MIR PRO and I am very sure that all the other demos can also sound much better without using MIR PRO.

I am a friend of SM instruments from the first day on and I know that you must learn all their instruments nearly like a real instrument. But if you have learned it, you can get very best results.

Congrats to SM!


----------



## PerryD

I just did a _very_ loose short section of Night on Bald Mountain, trying more aggressive playing with SM strings. They are a bit buried in this mix. Fun stuff.


----------



## bflat

Vardaro said:


> Just been reading through the manual. SM seems ro have thought of everything!
> In particular the slight, momentary pitch distortions due to bow pressure, which (to my ears) is completely missing from the SWAM strings: added bow noise is not enough.
> I should like to hear more solo demos before buying, though..



Adding bow noise is not the right way to control bow pressure in SWAM Solo Strings. Bow pressure is controlled by note-on velocity, Accent, and - of course - Bow Pressure (both can be mapped to any MIDI CC or AfterTouch).
Also, Interactive BowPress on Options page. From the user manual: "Interactive BowPress: controls the amount of correction of the bow pressure to maintain a good vibrating sound."


----------



## I like music

bflat said:


> Adding bow noise is not the right way to control bow pressure in SWAM Solo Strings. Bow pressure is controlled by note-on velocity, Accent, and - of course - Bow Pressure (both can be mapped to any MIDI CC or AfterTouch).
> Also, Interactive BowPress on Options page. From the user manual: "Interactive BowPress: controls the amount of correction of the bow pressure to maintain a good vibrating sound."



I haven't used SWAM strings all that much (laziness) but yes, I recall there being a specific bow pressure value, which gave interesting and good results.


----------



## germancomponist

But in this thread we are not talking about the SWAM strings, but the new SM strings...!


----------



## Bollen

I'm a massive fan of SM, but agree with some the demos are awful... Gimme a free copy and I'll make you some demos that'll blow your mind...


----------



## I like music

germancomponist said:


> But in this thread we are not talking about the SWAM strings, but the new SM strings...!



Very true. I guess it will always come up as a point of comparison in some form or another, but yes, best to focus on SM. Been a day or two, wondering how many people have played around with it and whether they have any feedback?


----------



## chapbot

Samplemodeling, you simply MUST do some walk-through videos asap. I'd even be happy with an MP3 if anybody here could just play a few simple lines of each patch out of the box. I wanna hear those cellos! How does the patch sound with a larger vs. a smaller ensemble? Etc.

I've been really excited about these strings and was ready to buy the second they came out but the demos scared me off. Then Saxer's and especially Perry's dry demos got me interested again. I finally decided to take the plunge a few minutes ago expecting the price to be $399 plus my 10% discount. Opps, that's the EU price. US price is $459. That's just too much to take a chance without getting a clear idea of how each patch sounds right out of the box. I think people are enjoying 8dio's walkthroughs - I certainly am. Here's an example of one of their recent Adagio walkthroughs:



I think this technology is amazing and it appears like a bunch of people here share my excitement, but $400+ is a lot to pay when I feel like I'm taking a blind chance


----------



## lp59burst

Bollen said:


> I'm a massive fan of SM, but agree with some the demos are awful... Gimme a free copy and I'll make you some demos that'll blow your mind...


...give me a free copy and I'll make some demo's that'll may _theirs_ sound better by comparison... simpler that way...


----------



## Vardaro

Bow pressure? Yes the SWAM strings have this parameter, but I'm refering to the very specific momentary pitch distortions that this entails in real strings, and which I don't hear in the pure modeled strings. The "grain" of a sampled string does not seem to exist (yet?) in waveguide synthesis.


----------



## Vardaro

Oh, and I forgot toask the beta testers here: what are the note ranges of the four solo instruments? This is a decisive factor in my mockups..


----------



## I like music

Vardaro said:


> Bow pressure? Yes the SWAM strings have this parameter, but I'm refering to the very specific momentary pitch distortions that this entails in real strings, and which I don't hear in the pure modeled strings. The "grain" of a sampled string does not seem to exist (yet?) in waveguide synthesis.



I might be thinking of a different parameter. I was fairly sure that increasing bow pressure induced some pitch distortion, although I only tested this at the extremes. I'll take a look today to see if this was something i had imagined, or if it was real.

I really really want to hear more solo instrument mockups. After all, they excelled with their solo instruments on the brass side, so I'm imagining that the solo strings will have a fantastic controllability.


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr

I didn´t bought them, but I listened to the demos on their page and also to Saxers demo. His demo is definitely better than all of them I listened on their page still even in his demo I hear some registers where its very obvious total synth sound to me. The Paganini Excerpt is nice though. I can imagine to use them for layering to add a bit different timbre and more expression to a already good sounding programmed string line but using them solely I am not sure tbh with you..they have something synthy and they sound very dark and dull (which you can probably push a bit with a good analog mastering eq, or an exciter). The problem is also that room..it sounds like dead, its simply not really exciting. That is something beyond their strings, its something what is just difficult to get right with that kind of very dry recorded strings. Also the bigger the instruments get the more difficult it is to get that natural room ompf reflection what especially the bigger instruments do and how they reverberate and excite the room in a way that its almost impossible to get right. Now this is not a fault of sm, but you should understand that and I would say this library could be useful for some lyrical writing and smaller ensembles and probably some layering for fast runs or lines. I appreciate of course the effort that sm for exploring new waters here.


----------



## Vardaro

The manual actually suggests using our own prefered staging.

The Paganini is amazing. As this library uses sample modeling for its articulations (and a controllable degree of randomisation), it will surely be possible to" enliven" the Tchaikovsky and Schumann note-ons without spoiling their lyrical qualities?


----------



## Fa

Vardaro said:


> The manual actually suggests using our own prefered staging.
> 
> The Paganini is amazing. As this library uses sample modeling for its articulations (and a controllable degree of randomisation), it will surely be possible to" enliven" the Tchaikovsky and Schumann note-ons without spoiling their lyrical qualities?


Definitely yes. You cant change so much in the pristine sound, but you can change almost everything in the expression. I was in big trouble to pick the “right” note in the middle of 1000 possible options just combining controllers to sculpt the sound. I did some choice dictated by instinct or by imitation of real performance, but every time I did a choice, I was regretting the other possibilities, and tempted to make new versions LOL... following your taste and inspiration you may do it exactly at your will.


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr

I mean in case the sm strings can somehow capture that here, then I am totally sold. Let me know if some of the guys who have sm string can replicate some of that stuff in a convicing way. Though I am not even sure what kind of meat usage that library is meant to be by the developer? Big orchestra sound? Or like more of that delicate stuff? I think the developer should do also a proper walkthrough pointing out their intention and philosophy what they had in mind. I think that would help to understand more and help for a buying decision.


----------



## novaburst

I think there is to much putting down of this Library and not giving it a chance, from what i am hearing on this thread is the S M website demos are bad so its like dont get the library then on the other hand @Saxer demo was fantastic and it was such a short demo from Saxer, so that is very confusing and mixed messages.

To me its quite clear that there is a skill factor involved here and as always what we are hearing is a good representation of the Library and a bad one and we all know that bad demos if you call it bad, they do not do the library justice.

So lets stop talking the library down because we all understand where the problem is coming from, and lets wait for better demos instead.

I would suggest who ever does any demos to just relax and take your time and do it as you would in your every day muck ups using what ever plugins you always use.

I think this is the type of library we all have been waiting for so lets embrace it and encourage S M

But i am not sure whats going on with the pricing 399 euro but in UK £459 what gives i may need to travel to France to purchase because pricing seems a tad unfair


----------



## I like music

novaburst said:


> I think there is to much putting down of this Library and not giving it a chance, from what i am hearing on this thread is the S M website demos are bad so its like dont get the library then on the other hand @Saxer demo was fantastic and it was such a short demo from Saxer, so that is very confusing and mixed messages.
> 
> To me its quite clear that there is a skill factor involved here and as always what we are hearing is a good representation of the Library and a bad one and we all know that bad demos if you call it bad, they do not do the library justice.
> 
> So lets stop talking the library down because we all understand where the problem is coming from, and lets wait for better demos instead.
> 
> I would suggest who ever does any demos to just relax and take your time and do it as you would in your every day muck ups using what ever plugins you always use.
> 
> I think this is the type of library we all have been waiting for so lets embrace it and encourage S M
> 
> But i am not sure whats going on with the pricing 399 euro but in UK £459 what gives i may need to travel to France to purchase because pricing seems a tad unfair



I think that's the VAT added? And it seems like no conversion to gbp either. That's a hell of a lot more expensive than it initially seemed.

Also, I have a feeling that in the coming weeks and months we're going to get some really good demos from this. In the same way that some people have turned out sheer gold with SM Brass, I imagine that there will be skilled people who will make the strings sound really good. This is the kind of library that from _initial_ user demos etc, won't usually sound as good as it can because of the learning that must go into it.

Definitely keeping an eye on this.


----------



## pmcrockett

I like music said:


> Also, I have a feeling that in the coming weeks and months we're going to get some really good demos from this. In the same way that some people have turned out sheer gold with SM Brass, I imagine that there will be skilled people who will make the strings sound really good. This is the kind of library that from _initial_ user demos etc, won't usually sound as good as it can because of the learning that must go into it.



I agree. My feeling is that demos for these sorts of modeled/hybrid instruments are never going to be as good as what users do with them a couple years after release, because so much of using these instruments is trial and error and figuring out what works best for you. Anyone using the instruments on release, or God forbid, in beta, is at a disadvantage because they have to learn the instrument cold with no crowd-sourced knowledge from the broader community about what works well and what doesn't.

I've felt this way about various instrument demos from both Samplemodeling and Audio Modeling, but I've always been extremely impressed by the instruments once I've actually had the opportunity to use them for myself.


----------



## David Cuny

I'm looking forward to hearing more demos. My primary interest is in a lyrical, solo context. I heard a bit of that in the *Meditation* demo at 1:38, and I really like what I hear there.

The *Tchaikovsky* example also has a solo string line, but has got a "fuzzy" tone - probably because of the reverb and placement in the room.

I hear some solo cello on the *Schumann* demo, but in context it's hard to tell how detailed the cello sound is.

The string _ensemble_ sound is lovely and sweet, but to my ears there's something "wrong" about it. It has the _timbre_ of a string section, but when it's in motion, it fails to convince my ear that it's being created by a group of instruments.

That said, I was originally unimpressed by the AM strings, but I eventually took the chance with the cello, and the cello convinced me to buy most of the rest of their strings.

I have difficulty imagining that the SM strings aren't at least on par with the AM strings. I just need to make sure that the difference make this library worth buying.

So I'm still hoping to be convinced to buy this library. I suspect it'll happen when - as others have suggested - a more detailed walkthrough shows off the sounds of the individual instruments.


----------



## Bollen

lp59burst said:


> ...give me a free copy and I'll make some demo's that'll may _theirs_ sound better by comparison... simpler that way...


Heh, heh, heh! We'll put.... I'm tempted to send them a demo made with dimensions strings just show them how it's done!


----------



## Bollen

By the way, does anybody know the level of divisi control possible with this library? The manual just says you can change the size of the ensemble, but not from what to what... 14 violins down to 2 for example?


----------



## DANIELE

I noticed that if I use envelopes (I'm using Reaper) to control parameters with ensemble instruments they doesn't work due to the synchronize process, so I cannot modify parameters. This is really a downside for me, could you please take in account some solution for this?


----------



## pmcrockett

DANIELE said:


> I noticed that if I use envelopes (I'm using Reaper) to control parameters with ensemble instruments they doesn't work due to the synchronize process, so I cannot modify parameters. This is really a downside for me, could you please take in account some solution for this?


I don't actually have the library (yet?) so I'm making some assumptions here. The problem is that it only controls properly if you send it MIDI CC values, but not if you directly automate the Kontakt controls, right?

I think this is fixable -- add ReaControlMIDI directly before Kontakt, enable ReaControlMIDI's Control Change section, and set the control types to match what the library needs for input. Then automate the control sliders in ReaControlMIDI with envelopes instead of the Kontakt controls, and ReaControlMIDI will send the appropriate CC data to Kontakt.


----------



## Fa

DANIELE said:


> I noticed that if I use envelopes (I'm using Reaper) to control parameters with ensemble instruments they doesn't work due to the synchronize process, so I cannot modify parameters. This is really a downside for me, could you please take in account some solution for this?



This is not the way they are intended to work: you must create your envelopes with CC, and not with Kontakt automation: there is no need of automating a knob, that is just the "handle" for a MIDI CC. Send the MIDI CC and all the ensemble will react in parallel, no need of synchronization at all. 
(The synchronization function is only for sending to slaves the manual adjustment you make on master knobs).


----------



## Fa

Bollen said:


> By the way, does anybody know the level of divisi control possible with this library? The manual just says you can change the size of the ensemble, but not from what to what... 14 violins down to 2 for example?



The ensemble size is a midi CC (#95): at =0 it simulates round 5 players and at =127 more than 20.
So if you need less than 5, you have to engage the solos, because the minimum size is not going so far.


----------



## antcarrier

I bought it because of how integral SM Brass has become to my workflow. So far, I'm extremely impressed, although I have only really been using the ensemble strings so far. Not saying that the solo strings aren't good - I haven't tried them yet because the ensemble strings have been so much fun.

I can actually see myself replacing some of my Dimension Strings with this, time will tell.


----------



## I like music

antcarrier said:


> I bought it because of how integral SM Brass has become to my workflow. So far, I'm extremely impressed, although I have only really been using the ensemble strings so far. Not saying that the solo strings aren't good - I haven't tried them yet because the ensemble strings have been so much fun.
> 
> I can actually see myself replacing some of my Dimension Strings with this, time will tell.



Great to hear! Any opinions on what you've tried and what aspects of it you're liking? Based on what you said about replacing Dimensions, I'm assuming you're impressed by the tone as well.


----------



## DANIELE

pmcrockett said:


> I don't actually have the library (yet?) so I'm making some assumptions here. The problem is that it only controls properly if you send it MIDI CC values, but not if you directly automate the Kontakt controls, right?
> 
> I think this is fixable -- add ReaControlMIDI directly before Kontakt, enable ReaControlMIDI's Control Change section, and set the control types to match what the library needs for input. Then automate the control sliders in ReaControlMIDI with envelopes instead of the Kontakt controls, and ReaControlMIDI will send the appropriate CC data to Kontakt.





Fa said:


> This is not the way they are intended to work: you must create your envelopes with CC, and not with Kontakt automation: there is no need of automating a knob, that is just the "handle" for a MIDI CC. Send the MIDI CC and all the ensemble will react in parallel, no need of synchronization at all.
> (The synchronization function is only for sending to slaves the manual adjustment you make on master knobs).



You are right!! I usually use ReaControlMIDI for pretty much every instrument I have in my template, I did only a fast try and I tried to automate Kontakt CC directly, this is the same thing of moving the knobs on the GUI clearly.

Anyway, everything is ok now. Thank you.


----------



## Bollen

Fa said:


> The ensemble size is a midi CC (#95): at =0 it simulates round 5 players and at =127 more than 20.
> So if you need less than 5, you have to engage the solos, because the minimum size is not going so far.


5??? Nice... I can't imagine needing larger divisi very often. Do these numbers also apply to violins 2?
How about making a 14 piece from the solos, is it possible without too much phasing issues?


----------



## artomatic

Would sure love to hear more user demos. 
Something doesn't sound right. Lifeless and dull (IMHO). 
I do like some articulations...
Perhaps a walkthrough as well will make the decision for me...


----------



## Fa

Bollen said:


> 5??? Nice... I can't imagine needing larger divisi very often. Do these numbers also apply to violins 2?
> How about making a 14 piece from the solos, is it possible without too much phasing issues?


Nope, actually solos are intended for... solos  but you may use them as first chair as well, or for divisi of very small ensemble. ( e.g I’m programming a piece for very small ensemble and when violins 1 are divisi , I’m using 3 solos). Yes same numbers apply to Violins 2


----------



## germancomponist

I will get my fingers on this library, because I think it is worth it. I remember the hundrets of comments when SM Brass came out, and now all my befriended composers tell me, that the SM Brass is the best brass library in the sampling world .... . Huh .....`


----------



## DANIELE

Is there someone that could help me doing this (measured tremolo at 1:35) with this library?



Thank you.


----------



## Fa

DANIELE said:


> Is there someone that could help me doing this (measured tremolo at 1:35) with this library?
> 
> Thank you.



Hi @DANIELE , misured tremolo is possible in 2 different ways: 
- using controller CC19 to change the speed of automatic tremolo to the requested speed, when precise tempo is not difficult to find and if the requested speed is into the range of the cc19 variations of course.

- if a very precise tempo synchronization and accents are requested, then it can be written in plain notation as a repetition, and the right sound can be fine tuned with several refinements (velocity and expression first, but attack speed and release time as well).

In this example I would try with written tremolo, mid velocity, low expression, mid-low attack and release CC. A very little bit of attack detuning CC can help to give more life if it sounds a bit too mechanic 
(e.g. sometime you can't change the velocity too much or unwanted accents pop up, and then you may play with other attack variations like CC26 for attack and attack detuning little amounts, as =5 to 10)


----------



## DANIELE

Fa said:


> Hi @DANIELE , misured tremolo is possible in 2 different ways:
> - using controller CC19 to change the speed of automatic tremolo to the requested speed, when precise tempo is not difficult to find and if the requested speed is into the range of the cc19 variations of course.
> 
> - if a very precise tempo synchronization and accents are requested, then it can be written in plain notation as a repetition, and the right sound can be fine tuned with several refinements (velocity and expression first, but attack speed and release time as well).
> 
> In this example I would try with written tremolo, mid velocity, low expression, mid-low attack and release CC. A very little bit of attack detuning CC can help to give more life if it sounds a bit too mechanic
> (e.g. sometime you can't change the velocity too much or unwanted accents pop up, and then you may play with other attack variations like CC26 for attack and attack detuning little amounts, as =5 to 10)



Ok, I'll try with the second one and maybe I'll post my results.

For the future I think that it will be great if you could do a midi file with all the articulations playable with the library to give users some kind of "instructions" on how to do the job.


----------



## leon chevalier

germancomponist said:


> I will get my fingers on this library, because I think it is worth it. I remember the hundrets of comments when SM Brass came out, and now all my befriended composers tell me, that the SM Brass is the best brass library in the sampling world .... . Huh .....`


I second that ! Well said 😊


----------



## LHall

Vardaro said:


> Oh, and I forgot toask the beta testers here: what are the note ranges of the four solo instruments? This is a decisive factor in my mockups..


----------



## Vardaro

Thanks!
Just enough.. e.g.I practice four full octaves on my viola. I want my mockups to sound like me , but better (or like when I was younger..)


----------



## Bollen

Fa said:


> Nope, actually solos are intended for... solos  but you may use them as first chair as well, or for divisi of very small ensemble. ( e.g I’m programming a piece for very small ensemble and when violins 1 are divisi , I’m using 3 solos). Yes same numbers apply to Violins 2


Sorry, some of it was very clarifying and the other bit was confusing. I'll break it down to 3 final questions:

1.- How many solo violins are there or are they all "made" from the same instrument?
2.- Does the size controller (CC95) give you information on how many instruments are being emulated?
3.- Do the 2nd violins actually sound different, in which case you could have one section, combining both, with up to 10 voices divisi? (i.e. setting both at 5 instruments)

If I had this library I would've made a walkthrough already showing all the possibilities...


----------



## I like music

This is very confusing. I listened again, and this time I really liked everything I heard; things that I had an unsure feeling about before, now sound good. Hmmm, very confusing indeed.


----------



## Fa

Bollen said:


> Sorry, some of it was very clarifying and the other bit was confusing. I'll break it down to 3 final questions:
> 
> 1.- How many solo violins are there or are they all "made" from the same instrument?
> 2.- Does the size controller (CC95) give you information on how many instruments are being emulated?
> 3.- Do the 2nd violins actually sound different, in which case you could have one section, combining both, with up to 10 voices divisi? (i.e. setting both at 5 instruments)
> 
> If I had this library I would've made a walkthrough already showing all the possibilities...



I agree with the walkthrough, that will be the next step of SM people (some are already under preparation)

I'm sorry for confusing you, I can give some more answers, but limited by some IP confidentiality.
I didn't mean that you have 5 voices, but 5 players per voice as a limit: if the section was a very large "round 20 players section" (made with cc95 at 127), and you have a 4 voices divisi, you will play the 4 voices passage with "round 5 players per voice" (made with cc95 at 0), to get a balanced sound.

If you need to make micro-divisi with lot of voices, then you should not use the cc95, but assign the parts to some solos instead, that was my comment. (like in real life).

Answers:

1. they are not solo violins, but the ensemble sound is made with a new proprietary technology, developed by Giorgio Tommasini. They are not made from the same instrument of course, or it would not work. I can't explain secret technical details, sorry, but the process is an extension of the Sample Modeling approach: the sound is unassembled into acoustic components that are modulated independently in 4 Kontakt modules to create all the nuances and imperfections increasing the realism of the performance, and reassembled for the final result. 

2. No, just small medium or large. But the cc95 goes from 0 to 127, and can simulate roughly from 5 to 20 players. That's the reason for giving you some kind of references before.

3. The 2nd violins are sounding different, you may use them in unison like the real thing. Only PC resources are the limit. (but modern PC can run several ensembles and solos all together without the need of freezing tracks. My Mac Pro 2013 can run up to 10 multis and 4 solos + winds and percussions)


----------



## DANIELE

I'm experiencing a bug maybe.

Put a long note in piano roll, then a Bow Change/Detaché ks, then you retrigger the note, play and stop after the retriggered note. The note remain stuck forever and the only way to stop it is to press again on the Bow Change/Detaché KS. Is there anyone that could do the try?

EDIT

I did another test, it is enough to put a single note and an overlapping Bow Change/Detaché KS, even without retriggering it the note remain stuck forever until I press the same KS again but only if it doesn't overlap any note. I don't know if it is the library or Reaper fault but many other libraries works just fine.

EDIT 2

I think I found why. If you press KS at high velocity (now I don't remember the exact threshold) you have a toggle KS behavior, if you play the KS under this threshold you have a momentary behavior. By putting the KS at low velocity the problem is solved. Is this an expected behavior? If I put the KS in toggle mode when I press STOP on my daw shouldn't the sound stop?


----------



## Fa

I like music said:


> This is very confusing. I listened again, and this time I really liked everything I heard; things that I had an unsure feeling about before, now sound good. Hmmm, very confusing indeed.



I think it depends on what are you focusing on: if you listen to music with open mind, you appreciate the musicality and rich amount of nuances the instrument produces. Maybe with a cold and technical dissection you may notice the imperfections or limitations.

I think that this instrument is a perfect complement of a composer's arsenal: it does things that other professional libraries can't do (sculpting the sound at your will, producing a seamless variation of short and long notes, and any kind of trills runs and legatos with the same flexibility and variations. Even more important it blends perfectly into other existing libraries maybe perfect for other aspects: the final mix will be a step forward to anything possible before IMVHO).


----------



## Fa

DANIELE said:


> I'm experiencing a bug maybe.
> 
> Put a long note in piano roll, then a Bow Change/Detaché ks, then you retrigger the note, play and stop after the retriggered note. The note remain stuck forever and the only way to stop it is to press again on the Bow Change/Detaché KS. Is there anyone that could do the try?
> 
> EDIT
> 
> I did another test, it is enough to put a single note and an overlapping Bow Change/Detaché KS, even without retriggering it the note remain stuck forever until I press the same KS again but only if it doesn't overlap any note. I don't know if it is the library or Reaper fault but many other libraries works just fine.



This is not a bug, it was intended as a feature for Live play: the detachè KS once it's on, it works like a sustain pedal, and keep the sound forever, until the following note start, or you turn it off.

(that way you may press a key on the keyboard too far for your fingers to be played legato, and still keep the detachè legato effect without any interruption)


----------



## I like music

Fa said:


> I think it depends on what are you focusing on: if you listen to music with open mind, you appreciate the musicality and rich amount of nuances the instrument produces. Maybe with a cold and technical dissection you may notice the imperfections or limitations.
> 
> I think that this instrument is a perfect complement of a composer's arsenal: it does things that other professional libraries can't do (sculpting the sound at your will, producing a seamless variation of short and long notes, and any kind of trills runs and legatos with the same flexibility and variations. Even more important it blends perfectly into other existing libraries maybe perfect for other aspects: the final mix will be a step forward to anything possible before IMVHO).



Agreed. I was originally trying to dissect and probably did so too quickly. The more I hear the more I like. Let's hope work gives me a random bonus so I can invest.


----------



## DANIELE

Fa said:


> This is not a bug, it was intended as a feature for Live play: the detachè KS once it's on, it works like a sustain pedal, and keep the sound forever, until the following note start, or you turn it off.



Yes, I remembered that, I wrote an EDIT 2 on my previous post while you are writing this. But is this an expected behavior even when I press STOP?


----------



## Bollen

Fa said:


> I agree with the walkthrough, that will be the next step of SM people (some are already under preparation)
> 
> I'm sorry for confusing you, I can give some more answers, but limited by some IP confidentiality.
> I didn't mean that you have 5 voices, but 5 players per voice as a limit: if the section was a very large "round 20 players section" (made with cc95 at 127), and you have a 4 voices divisi, you will play the 4 voices passage with "round 5 players per voice" (made with cc95 at 0), to get a balanced sound.
> 
> If you need to make micro-divisi with lot of voices, then you should not use the cc95, but assign the parts to some solos instead, that was my comment. (like in real life).
> 
> Answers:
> 
> 1. they are not solo violins, but the ensemble sound is made with a new proprietary technology, developed by Giorgio Tommasini. They are not made from the same instrument of course, or it would not work. I can't explain secret technical details, sorry, but the process is an extension of the Sample Modeling approach: the sound is unassembled into acoustic components that are modulated independently in 4 Kontakt modules to create all the nuances and imperfections increasing the realism of the performance, and reassembled for the final result.
> 
> 2. No, just small medium or large. But the cc95 goes from 0 to 127, and can simulate roughly from 5 to 20 players. That's the reason for giving you some kind of references before.
> 
> 3. The 2nd violins are sounding different, you may use them in unison like the real thing. Only PC resources are the limit. (but modern PC can run several ensembles and solos all together without the need of freezing tracks. My Mac Pro 2013 can run up to 10 multis and 4 solos + winds and percussions)



Thank you, that's much clearer! So...

1.- The question about Solo instruments was because on the website it says it includes 4 instruments, which made me think I could not have 2 solo violins playing in unison because they would produce artifacts... Namely phasing issues...(?)

2.- Right, so no possibility of controlling the individual desks, gotta play it by ear then ... 0=5, 127=20, so 64 would be hmmmm... Damn my math sucks!

3.- Yes, my PC can run all of VSL libraries simultaneously so it shouldn't be a problem, thank you for that!

If you can answer number 1 I promise not to bug you anymore...


----------



## Fa

Bollen said:


> Thank you, that's much clearer! So...
> 
> 1.- The question about Solo instruments was because on the website it says it includes 4 instruments, which made me think I could not have 2 solo violins playing in unison because they would produce artifacts... Namely phasing issues...(?)
> 
> 
> If you can answer number 1 I promise not to bug you anymore...



It's a fair question, and the answer is:
- yes you may even play 2 (or more) solos in unison, if you just take very little care: you should use different body IR, and you should automate controllers in slightly different way. This last point is the more important: in real life no players can play exactly same vibrato, perfect attack, similar intonation etc. If the very same MIDI track plays 2 (or more) solos, they will sound weird, and tend to sound unreal and bandoneon-like. If you spend the time of imitating the reality (slightly different vibrato amount and rate, slightly different intonation and time for each solo player) the result will be very rewarding. 

(e.g. The easiest way for differentiating intonation is writing different minimal pitchbend envelopes for each player. Shortcut is to just differentiate few cents overall intonation, but this way sounds easily fake. Pitchbend variation is better).


----------



## Vardaro

Download completed! I'm concentrating on solo instruments for now, and shall compare with other VSO-vibrato libraries: Embertone Intimate strings, Chris Hein legacy solo strings (which have non-vib patches), then Xsamples (likewise) and Kirk Hunter Spotlight Solo.

Tone? Lovely violin and viola..
Only one "body" IR for the moment; more to come..


----------



## I like music

Vardaro said:


> Download completed! I'm concentrating on solo instruments for now, and shall compare with other VSO-vibrato libraries: Embertone Intimate strings, Chris Hein legacy solo strings (which have non-vib patches), then Xsamples (likewise) and Kirk Hunter Spotlight Solo.
> 
> Tone? Lovely violin and viola..
> Only one "body" IR for the moment; more to come..



Curious to see what you think!


----------



## DANIELE

Another question: expressive legato articulation, how it works? From the manual it says it applies an expressive crescendo on each new legato note. Where should I put the KS. I tried with 3 legato notes, I put it at the end of the first one and heared a sort of repetition of the note before the second legato note cames in. I did the same under the end of the second note but it doesn't do anything
I'm sure I didn't understand how it works...anyone?


----------



## CT

germancomponist said:


> I think what people do not like is the sound of MIR PRO 24.



There are parts of the raw sound itself that absolutely don't work for me, but MIR does seem to be a recurring offender for my ears in demos from certain developers. I've never really heard it sound anything but terrible, especially when slathered on sounds that are already a little dodgy.

Despite that, as someone who values being able to play in parts with no fuss, I do value the technology behind modeling, and hope it continues to improve in the sonic department.


----------



## Fa

DANIELE said:


> Another question: expressive legato articulation, how it works? From the manual it says it applies an expressive crescendo on each new legato note. Where should I put the KS. I tried with 3 legato notes, I put it at the end of the first one and heared a sort of repetition of the note before the second legato note cames in. I did the same under the end of the second note but it doesn't do anything
> I'm sure I didn't understand how it works...anyone?



The KS has to be before the sequence of slurred notes you want to be affected, and then as usual disengaged when it's no longer requested. Being a legato, it works only if notes are in little overlapping, and it's not polyphonic.

p.s. Peter S. created it for a very special purpose of "expressive legato", but I had success using it for portato as well.


----------



## robgb

DANIELE said:


> Is there someone that could help me doing this (measured tremolo at 1:35) with this library?
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you.



You might try this. Don't know if it would work with this particular library, however:






Repetition key multiscript? Is it even possible?


Does anyone know if there is an assignable repetition multiscript? I.e. C0 repeats last note used, maintaining the velocity used when you press the repetition key(so it doesn't machine gun the last velocity, but rather repeats the note using the new velocity) I find it's extremely useful in...




vi-control.net


----------



## DANIELE

Fa said:


> The KS has to be before the sequence of slurred notes you want to be affected, and then as usual disengaged when it's no longer requested. Being a legato, it works only if notes are in little overlapping, and it's not polyphonic.
> 
> p.s. Peter S. created it for a very special purpose of "expressive legato", but I had success using it for portato as well.



Ok I tried it but it seems it affects only the first legato transition, the other ones are the same with or without the KS. For example, if I use three legato notes and I put the KS before the first one I hear this only in the legato transition between the first and the second note, nothing between the second and the third one...

Also...should the note have a minimum length? If I play short legato notes there's no difference in using or not the KS. I think I'm still not understanding how it works.



robgb said:


> You might try this. Don't know if it would work with this particular library, however:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Repetition key multiscript? Is it even possible?
> 
> 
> Does anyone know if there is an assignable repetition multiscript? I.e. C0 repeats last note used, maintaining the velocity used when you press the repetition key(so it doesn't machine gun the last velocity, but rather repeats the note using the new velocity) I find it's extremely useful in...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> vi-control.net



Ehi thank you, I'll look at this.


----------



## Sam Reed

DANIELE said:


> Ok I tried it but it seems it affects only the first legato transition, the other ones are the same with or without the KS.



Hi Daniele, I don't own this library yet so I'm not sure if this is the solution, but I think I remember in the manual there is a distinction between keyswitches which are fleeting (affecting only the next note) and those that "stick" (affecting all subsequent notes until you send another keyswitch). I think it might have been keyswitch velocity that tells the instrument which one you want?

I hope this is the source of the issue for you, because if so you will be able to get it to behave how you expect very quickly & easily.


----------



## DANIELE

Sam Reed said:


> Hi Daniele, I don't own this library yet so I'm not sure if this is the solution, but I think I remember in the manual there is a distinction between keyswitches which are fleeting (affecting only the next note) and those that "stick" (affecting all subsequent notes until you send another keyswitch). I think it might have been velocity that tells the instrument which one you want?
> 
> I hope this is the source of the issue for you, because if so you will be able to get it to behave how you expect very quickly & easily.



Thank you Sam for the help. I already knew about this, I tried both with high and low velocity with no result, I don't understand how this KS behaves. I noticed that by pressing on it the attack knob go all the way down to 13 to return at previous position once the KS is released.


----------



## Dani Donadi

I bought the library, let me tell you what my thoughts are.

I have all major orchestral sample libraries, it is easier to work with samples but switching articulations has never been my forte, I find the switches unnatural and the volumes are often inconsistent. But for a quick mock-up, or for someone that likes to input notes with a mouse, nothing beats great samples, ad we have a lot of choice.

SM Strings on the other hand are an instrument, if you are ready to invest time to learn the software, you can get a real performance, I personally like to play each part on the keyboard and SM Strings are great for that, there's no latency.
When I first installed the library, the presets weren't my cup of tea, I found them too sterile and stiff.
After spending hours customizing each section in detail, I can now say that these are the best virtual strings I've ever had........ but it takes a lot of work to get the performance you like.

If you think the brass were outstanding, then I think the strings are just as great. 

My take.


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

Dani Donadi said:


> I bought the library, let me tell you what my thoughts are.
> 
> I have all major orchestral sample libraries, it is easier to work with samples but switching articulations has never been my forte, I find the switches unnatural and the volumes are often inconsistent. But for a quick mock-up, or for someone that likes to input notes with a mouse, nothing beats great samples, ad we have a lot of choice.
> 
> SM Strings on the other hand are an instrument, if you are ready to invest time to learn the software, you can get a real performance, I personally like to play each part on the keyboard and SM Strings are great for that, there's no latency.
> When I first installed the library, the presets weren't my cup of tea, I found them too sterile and stiff.
> After spending hours customizing each section in detail, I can now say that these are the best virtual strings I've ever had........ but it takes a lot of work to get the performance you like.
> 
> If you think the brass were outstanding, then I think the strings are just as great.
> 
> My take.


Agreed. The ensembles, particularly, require careful study. But they can yield extraordinary results. I must confess, that after years, I'm still experimenting every single day to get the best out of them. I'm pretty sure there is room for further improvements.


----------



## jonnybutter

I have just installed and done a couple of hours of work with the library. The only thing I object to is the price - w/VAT it's a bit expensive. But worth it. it's super expressive and playable. I never liked key switching all these years - having to switch between halves of my brain when I'm playing a part. And, in contrast to, say, the Modartt pianos, you aren't trading off sound for expressiveness so much (I understand that it's a hybrid of samples and modeling voodoo). The sound is not as realistic as LASS (for example) but it's very good, and it blends with (other) samples well. And the expressiveness and spontaneity make up for a lot AFAIC. 

I've mainly used the ensembles so far, so no comments on the solo instruments. 

I love it so far.


----------



## Sam Reed

DANIELE said:


> I already knew about this, I tried both with high and low velocity with no result, I don't understand how this KS behaves.



Oh darn, well I'm sure when Fabio or someone gets a chance to see your post, they'll be able to help. I look forward to reading the solution because I'm sure it will save me some confusion later after I can purchase.


----------



## Sam Reed

jonnybutter said:


> The sound is not as realistic as LASS (for example) but it's very good, and it blends with (other) samples well.



Hi Jonny, 

I've never blended a library before, but it's on my list of things to learn/explore next. I realize you've only had it for a few hours, but do you have any initial general impressions/opinions re: blending Samplemodeling strings with other libraries? Or is everything context-dependent, i.e. "in this context LASS is supporting Samplemodeling, in this other context it's vice versa" ... ?

Any tips/observations based on your initial experiences are greatly appreciated, if you have time to write them up.

Thank you,
Sam


----------



## I like music

Dani Donadi said:


> After spending hours customizing each section in detail, I can now say that these are the best virtual strings I've ever had........ but it takes a lot of work to get the performance you like.



Really enjoyed the music on your site. Looking forward to any instances where you might use these in a project!


----------



## DANIELE

Sam Reed said:


> Oh darn, well I'm sure when Fabio or someone gets a chance to see your post, they'll be able to help. I look forward to reading the solution because I'm sure it will save me some confusion later after I can purchase.



Thank you SAM, I hope I will find how it works.

I've just inserted the violin solo in my primary template, I put it under the same Reverb I use for SWAM and OMG...what sound is this!? Perfect, now I've to understand well how to perform all the techniques...


----------



## Dani Donadi

I like music said:


> Really enjoyed the music on your site. Looking forward to any instances where you might use these in a project!


Thank you so much.


----------



## Fa

Still having some fun experimenting in very different applications. For instance:
a tzigane style and sautillè solo: 

a baroque polyphonic small ensemble:


----------



## TomaeusD

That Contrapunctus 1 example is on point... Bach would be proud, or frightened.


----------



## I like music

Fa said:


> Still having some fun experimenting in very different applications. For instance:
> a tzigane style and sautillè solo:
> 
> a baroque polyphonic small ensemble:




Nice!!! Love the first example in particular. I don't suppose there's any chance you could share a MIDI here so that we can see what it takes to get lines like that, to sound like that?


----------



## oboemaroni

Think my main issue with the sound is around the mushy/soft attack, especially on the ensemble patches, the legato transitions don't sound connected but all have the same soft fade in, it reminds me of Stevie Wonder's CS80 string sound on Songs in the Key of Life more than any real strings I've ever heard, or as if everything has gone through a transient shaper... I find the tone is also quite synthetic although better on the solo strings. 

I've said before here that I think the reason the SM Brass is so good is that both the modeling and sampling arms of the company were working together, everything I've heard them do separately has been much less organic sounding, including these strings unfortunately. I'll keep listening to demos but it's a pass for me.


----------



## MA-Simon

Me thinks, only usable for very slow and soft stuff. Which is not bad, but to limited for me.
In all the demos, the room sounds weird and unconvincing. Might just be me though.

Still! Awesome first step in a new direction! Which needs to be applauded!


----------



## Fa

I like music said:


> Nice!!! Love the first example in particular. I don't suppose there's any chance you could share a MIDI here so that we can see what it takes to get lines like that, to sound like that?


...maybe... why not? 

here you are: less complicated than you can expect (few set-up values are requested for getting the right articulations and they are saved in the track, but the big job is done by durations, velocity, cc11 and PB).


----------



## Fa

MA-Simon said:


> Me thinks, only usable for very slow and soft stuff. Which is not bad, but to limited for me.
> In all the demos, the room sounds weird and unconvincing. Might just be me though.
> 
> Still! Awesome first step in a new direction! Which needs to be applauded!



Your comment is very interesting:
If you are looking for something good for very fast and aggressive string music, this library can really make you happy. In fact...

- I personally don't agree with your first statement: for slow soft music we already have so much good libraries around. The power of SM Strings is the fact they provide for the best controls for very fast music (controllable trills, runs, every kind of legato transition, every kind of fast repetitions etc.) and an almost unlimited possibility of creating short notes (you may literally make your favorite or requested ones).

-About the room sound, this is very easy: there is no particular embedded room sound in the library (but just user adjustable early reflections) and you may just add your own and favorite one.


----------



## Fa

ka00 said:


> I thought I was crazy. That’s exactly what I thought of too when listening to Pastime Paradise the other day. Obviously these new strings sound much better, but there is some kernel of resemblance to that sound.



You mean this version right?  (watch at 3:00)


----------



## oboemaroni

ka00 said:


> I thought I was crazy. That’s exactly what I thought of too when listening to Pastime Paradise the other day. Obviously these new strings sound much better, but there is some kernel of resemblance to that sound.


 
Yes - even moreso on Village Ghetto Land


----------



## Leandro Gardini

Better than the demos on the website you have to spend some time testing the library yourself.
After a couple of days working with it I can say SM Strings is going to be one of the most used string libraries in my future mockups. I would even dare to say that this is the best string library ever created.
I am not a fan of the official demos and to be sincere it gave me a wrong impression once I heard it. Since I have all other SM libraries and I absolutely love them all i decided to buy the strings anyway hoping that one day they would update it with a more realistic sound.
After testing it I realized that there's no need for such update because the library is already extremely realistic and versatile. Sure there is room for improvement as every product has (mainly in the GUI) but once again Sample Modeling has provided us with another amazing virtual instrument that can rival any real musician.
If you don't like the sound of the demos try this simple thing. In the ensemble patches turn off the original IR in the AUX and apply your own.
My only critic would be regarding the ensemble size. There isn't any way to specify how many strings you have in your group. It's just small, medium and large. For someone that likes to work with a certain specific amount of instruments this is going to be a little odd but not a big deal compared to the amount of versatility and realism you can get out of this instrument.
Another thing that I missed was an extreme aggressive FF (that is rarely used) when the player rapidly strikes the bow down with a lot of pressure on the strings. Maybe it can be achieved by changing some parameters.
The implementation of it in my template was smooth this time. I remember that it was a struggle to match SM brass with the other wet libraries but with the strings it was much easier and it didn't take more than 15 minutes to match it with Hollywood Strings for example.
I remain exploring this library for further customization and the more I learn about it the more I like it.
Will it replace all the other strings?
Definitely not! There's no library that can make it all and a careful combination and usage of them is what make the secret. But I may say that SM can easily replace a lot of strings libraries out there.
If you are a composer that likes to be inspired by what you play with the patches this strings are probably not your best choice even though the solos are very inspiring. On the other hand, is you go to the library because you've been inspired before and is looking for an specific sound then SM strings will beautifully reproduce what you've had in mind with little programming.
Thank you once again Sample Modeling. Your technology is the best!!!
Thumbs up!!!


----------



## Saxer

I made a track using the strings in an orchestral arrangement. Here's a video showing the Logic session. First full mix and the second half is strings only.


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr

Saxer said:


> I made a track using the strings in an orchestral arrangement. Here's a video showing the Logic session. First full mix and the second half is strings only.





Nice track there, I really enjoyed it. How was it or is it working with the new strings? Do you have or had to control a lot of parameters for that piece? The Expression is surely there which I find great also the fluidity with the lines. Which was always good with the sm approach. (I love the sm brass as you know..)

What I unfortunately am not so stoked about is the tone timbre/ sound of the strings, somehow there is something very artificial about it to my ears. Its feels like a great "synth string sound" to me. But not like a conventional sounding string orchestra or ensemble sound at all. Its a way too clean sounding also and misses the dirt and raw character of what makes string sounds sound more authentic, also in the fast passages the kind of swirly dirtyness. Now as I know that you are pretty good knowing in what you are doing, I am curious if there are things to make them sound more realistic. Also the lower range instruments like Cellos and Doublebass. I listened to the piece both on the laptop first but then also on my studio speakers which then reveal even more what I was thinking. While listening just right now there is also something very artificial on the room. It sounds even worse on my speakers..:/ it gives me the impression of some kind of sampler or rompler from the mid 2000s but with more controllable features and much more expression but tonewise..man. I hate to say that here because I dig Sm brass so much and since I have it, it served me so well with many very difficult performances which I wouldn´t be able to pull of with any other vi still up to this date. And the strings here just doesn´t make it for me. A lovely track composition still and much appreciated you are trying your best in showcasing that new product in the best light.
I hope my sentiments are here well received. I don´t want to dump down the library at all but I would lie when I would say I am impressed..by the tonal / timbre aspect here.

Probably it needs much more room treatment, programming and post production with timbral shaping also. But one thing what I noticed is the first time I listened to the sm brass demos back then there was something more realistic in most of their demos even the early ones. I guess string instruments in the orchestra are simply the most difficult ones to get right because they are capable of so many different timbres and articulations and bowing techniques. I think modeling strings is almost like a shot in the dark to me. Its probably a long road still until there is coming something what makes normale sample based string libraries obselete.

Mhmm..I would love to get my fingers on this strings anyways just to try them out but pulling the trigger and fire out 400 more bucks right now is actually not on my budget unfortunately just to testify that I might be eventually wrong, you know?


----------



## Hanu_H

Saxer said:


> I made a track using the strings in an orchestral arrangement. Here's a video showing the Logic session. First full mix and the second half is strings only.



What an amazing composition and it sounds really good as well. I have to agree a bit with Alexander though that I would like to have more of the rosin and high end in the string sound. Maybe it is possible with some EQ? But man those runs... It would be really hard to pull this of with a normal sample library. What are the other libraries used in the piece?


----------



## jonnybutter

Sam Reed said:


> Hi Jonny,
> 
> I've never blended a library before, but it's on my list of things to learn/explore next. I realize you've only had it for a few hours, but do you have any initial general impressions/opinions re: blending Samplemodeling strings with other libraries? Or is everything context-dependent, i.e. "in this context LASS is supporting Samplemodeling, in this other context it's vice versa" ... ?
> 
> Any tips/observations based on your initial experiences are greatly appreciated, if you have time to write them up.
> 
> Thank you,
> Sam




You've never blended before? Are you sure?? 

Of course it's context dependent, like everything-audio!

I'm in the middle of a project right now, but when I have a chance I'll post some audio


----------



## Saxer

The only controller I used was CC1 (converted by a midi plugin to CC11 and CC7 with a flattened curve). There's probably more potential to add blur and randomness. 

The strings are out of the box except the room. I used the dry string presets and inserted one Breeze 2 per channel for early reflections and added a little Lexicon random hall tail of 2 seconds via send. Nothing fancy.

I don't really have a problem with the sound but there is still some way to go. Especially cncerning room mixing. On the other hand it's really fun to control the note lenght by... well, by note length! Finally! It feels much more like making music than any standard sample library with key switches and all. The only key switches I used were for pizz.

I actually cut some high end of the strings (-5 dB at 10KHz and above) to blend better with the other libraries and have them less close. All brass is Samplemodeling as well, woodwinds are a mix of Audiomodeling and WIVI. Percussion/Harp is from different libraries.

I will try layering the strings with other libraries sooner or later. But I don't want to loose the playability what makes the assortment very small. The most likely candidate I can imagine are the Performance Legatos of SCS.


----------



## bun

I like your composition a lot Saxer. I personally prefer the results of manually multi-tracked SWAM strings, but having more than one option for freely playable strings is a very good thing.


----------



## PerryD

Saxer said:


> I made a track using the strings in an orchestral arrangement. Here's a video showing the Logic session. First full mix and the second half is strings only.



Brilliant!


----------



## I like music

That solo *viola* demo sounds _really really_ good. I think they just uploaded it today, or something? If all the solo strings can sound like that, it'd be worth looking into it for the solos alone for many people, I imagine.


----------



## Garry

Saxer said:


> I made a track using the strings in an orchestral arrangement. Here's a video showing the Logic session. First full mix and the second half is strings only.



Absolutely incredible!! Just amazes me what can be done with these libraries in the hands of a skilled composer. Really fantastic composition - I thoroughly enjoyed it (and was disappointed to find your YouTube channel only contained this 1 piece - was looking forward to hearing more). 

Like you Saxer, I so much prefer the playability of the SM/AM approach, and have most of their products. I've had my eye on SCS for a while now, waiting to see what SM's strings would be like. Your demos are really convincing. I'm only going to choose one (I know they both do different things, but I'm not one for buying 20 different string libraries - I personally just don't need degree of flexibility in sound for my limited purposes). 

So, if I went for SCS, I'd clearly lose the playability of SM; but in your opinion, what would I miss from SCS if I went for SM strings (I already have Tundra & Albion One)? Clearly the Air Lyndhurst reverb - anything else in SCS you can't get from SM Strings? 

If you were only to buy one, which would you go for?


----------



## Garry

One other question: I have the AudioModeling Cello and Violin. I really love playing these, and the feel of control you get over over the performance. However, I'm not always happy with the tone, and it's certainly more challenging to get a track written using these, than something that uses a more standard approach, so I often find myself retreating to those libraries. 

How does the SM strings compare, in terms of tonality and playability to the Audio Modeling strings (other than the latter doesn't have ensembles).


----------



## I like music

Garry said:


> One other question: I have the AudioModeling Cello and Violin. I really love playing these, and the feel of control you get over over the performance. However, I'm not always happy with the tone, and it's certainly more challenging to get a track written using these, than something that uses a more standard approach, so I often find myself retreating to those libraries.
> 
> How does the SM strings compare, in terms of tonality and playability to the Audio Modeling strings (other than the latter doesn't have ensembles).



Did you see the updated demo on the site? I think they removed a demo or two (unsure) but definitely added a couple over the last few days. The solo viola one was very interesting to me, because the tone (and expression) here felt pretty good to me. I think it is called "Suite for Viola 1" but yes, keen to hear the answer from Saxer.


----------



## Bollen

Saxer said:


> The only controller I used was CC1 (converted by a midi plugin to CC11 and CC7 with a flattened curve



Ah! I think that might be one of the big issues... Runs were good and sloppy how you would expect, but I found the swelling and phrasing very "synthy" as well. It's probably because it's so symmetric. If I were to use these ever I would certainly use each section in more that one instance with mid size setting just to get a bit more of the natural sloppiness you get from lots of players in a section... This coming from someone that listens to the LSO live on a monthly basis!

Is there like a sloppiness setting in the instrument? Something to make the different players in the same section have a bit more randomness?

I agree with Alexander, so far I haven't heard anything that would make me cough 400 for this library...


----------



## Vardaro

First reactions, comparing with Embertone's Friedlander and Chris Hein's legacy Italian Violin; all three propose LFO vibrato on non-vib samples, with CC control of amplitude and frequency.

SM and ET are pleasing and very similar, with SM having a rounder tone, and more CC control of attacks, pitch-bends, and randomisation.

With Chris Hein the basic tone is less smooth, and the LFO controls seem less convincing; indeed Chris Hein has abandoned LFO vibrato in his "extended" versions of these libraries. However, he gives all his solo strings extended ranges, which I appreciate when writing music which I can no longer play myself! His layerable "noteheads" are a great success, but I feel that SM's scripted attacks will be just as "real".

All three propose scripted ensemble patches with degrees of randomisation (not to be confused with CH's voluminous Ensemble Strings library)

LFO vibrato has the the problem of modulating the violin's resonances along with the strings' pitches, and SM and CH offer "body" IR's to lessen the phase-like effects.

XSamples also offers alternative non-vib samples with LFO vibrato, but as I have no aftertouch I cannot try it. They also have ensemble patches.

BTW the viola solo on the SM site is the same piece as was used for the Swam viola as sold by SM before the AM seccession.. The new demo is more realistic to me as a violist..


----------



## novaburst

Saxer said:


> I made a track using the strings in an orchestral arrangement. Here's a video showing the Logic session. First full mix and the second half is strings only.




Nice one @Saxer you really aced the low end nice and deep loved it.



Hanu_H said:


> But man those runs...



Agree those runs sweet. 

Listened to the string only version makes me feel they are full of possibilities. 

Thanks for posting


----------



## dormusic

Is there any way of dramatically increasing the ensemble detune and timing? I reay think that could go a long way in increasing the quality of sound.


----------



## robgb

With all due respect to everyone here, I'd love to see a blind test of these against other instruments and see how many people call them "synthy."


----------



## I like music

dormusic said:


> Is there any way of dramatically increasing the ensemble detune and timing? I reay think that could go a long way in increasing the quality of sound.


Was thinking the very same thing with regards to transitions...


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr

robgb said:


> With all due respect to everyone here, I'd love to see a blind test of these against other instruments and see how many people call them "synthy."


We can do that..if you really like..


----------



## germancomponist

dormusic said:


> Is there any way of dramatically increasing the ensemble detune and timing? I reay think that could go a long way in increasing the quality of sound.



You mean for any instrument in a section, maybe by using that old "humaizer" script, for example? 






It works, for sure. I did hundreds of experiments with it, when I built sections with solo instruments. But now Samplemodeling comes with its super great new sections builder. Maybe later in an update they can it make more controllable, to let us add more "dirt"? (Dirt is good meant here...)


----------



## Bollen

germancomponist said:


> You mean for any instrument in a section, maybe by using that old "humaizer" script, for example?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It works, for sure. I did hundreds of experiments with it, when I built sections with solo instruments. But now Samplemodeling comes with its super great new sections builder. Maybe later in an update they can it make more controllable, to let us add more "dirt"? (Dirt is good meant here...)



Dirt is not only good but essential!


----------



## Saxer

Garry said:


> So, if I went for SCS, I'd clearly lose the playability of SM; but in your opinion, what would I miss from SCS if I went for SM strings (I already have Tundra & Albion One)? Clearly the Air Lyndhurst reverb - anything else in SCS you can't get from SM Strings?
> 
> If you were only to buy one, which would you go for?


SCS is a fantastic library and probably the most complete in terms of playing styles in separate sections. Spiccs, staccs with and without sordinos, flautandos... very complete and wonderful sounding library. The small section feels a bit lost in the big Air hall for my taste and makes it sound more on the thin side. Not a Hollywood library to beef up thick low mids.
For my own working style I'd switch to SM in a second. The do what I want them to do. Personal desicion. If you work like: Oh, this sounds really nice, what can I do with it? - Go for SCS. If you work like: This are the things I want them to play, what library can do this? - Go for SM. Better: get both.


----------



## Vardaro

Saxers demos sound to my expert  ear like a very good string orchestra!
The fast runs are the most convincing I have heard, and the supple phrasing is really expressive: non of the "bulging" notes of many other demos.
I also like the possibilty of an apparently contiuous vibrato thanks to the possibility of zero delay on cc23.
Apart from the limited viola range, I should be able to stop boring eveyone with my own playing...


----------



## Bollen

Vardaro said:


> Saxers demos sound to my expert  ear like a very good string orchestra!
> The fast runs are the most convincing I have heard, and the supple phrasing is really expressive: non of the "bulging" notes of many other demos.
> I also like the possibilty of an apparently contiuous vibrato thanks to the possibility of zero delay on cc23.
> Apart from the limited viola range, I should be able to stop boring eveyone with my own playing...


 I disagree... Saxer is awesome in his ability, but the library sounds very synthy so far... And yes, I'm up for the challenge! The problem with us (MIDI people) is that we get so used to the artificial nature of all the software we use and we tend to forget what the real thing sounds like, hence why I try to go to live concerts at least a few times a month.


----------



## novaburst

AlexanderSchiborr said:


> Its probably a long road still until there is coming something what makes normale sample based string libraries obselete.



Not sure if a day like this will ever come, SM brass is perhaps a top brass library to have but it can not replace existing brass library's 

For the most part you will need the skill and ears to make it work, and I don't think skill levels can even surpass standard sample library's but I can only speak for myself. 

I think your post is based on experience and musical level so you will hear what some can not perhaps this may or may not help SM to revisit the library at some point,

SM based library's are for sure the way forward but many to some degree are able to get along with standard library's. 

I guess also depending on on the complexity of a musical piece you will then start to call upon these types of library's 


AlexanderSchiborr said:


> I dig Sm brass so much and since I have it, it served me so well with many very difficult performances which I wouldn´t be able to pull of with any other vi


----------



## I like music

I've never layered libraries. Mainly this is because I used to have to only have one section library on my HD due to hard drive space. If you layer two strings libraries, is it generally an additive affect (e.g. you get the best of both lirbaries) or would the performance limitations of the traditional library still 'pop' out from underneath?


----------



## antcarrier

I like music said:


> Great to hear! Any opinions on what you've tried and what aspects of it you're liking? Based on what you said about replacing Dimensions, I'm assuming you're impressed by the tone as well.



Yes, the tone is good. Unlike some of the other opinions expressed here, I find that it sounds excellent in MIR pro, with the on board reverb/ERs disabled.

In many ways it sounds more realistic than my other libraries. It sounds more like a performance, rather than samples. It certainly will have a bigger learning curve than sample libraries, with more complex automation, but already I feel that results are superior in most aspects with basic editing. Lines feel more lyrical and connected rather than a collage of sounds.
Some passages just sound fake and expressionless with sample libraries, with baked in expression (or lack of) that just cannot suit the music as it was intended to be played. This library seems to overcome this limitation. Additionally, if you are writing dynamic passages, the lack of velocity crossfades is a major advantage.

I also have SWAM strings but found that they have a synthy sound that I don't gel with, despite their flexibility. These do not have this problem IMO.


----------



## Fa

In my very humble opinion, after using the library a lot for few months during development, I can say that both the synthy and the realistic observations are fair: it's really a matter of use and performance.

I try to explain: the sound of a sustain of SM Strings ensemble has a soft and silky texture, even if staccatos and attacks can be played very rough and dirty if you want/need. If you play it flat and don't inflate life into it with a bit of controllers, then the risk of getting the "very good string synth" effect is pretty high.

The performance by the way, is always superior to any synth or any other library, due to the unique AI of the scripts, really offering any continuous variation of transitions and attacks you may expect in strings music, and the very good dynamic fading, superior to any competitors/traditional cross-fade.

Then to enjoy the benefit and avoid the weakness, it's often enough to take the time and move a bit the vibrato (depth, rate, and espressivo are 3 independent controllers) in combination with velocity and expression, for all the exposed or long notes. I understand that using cc11 and cc1 is temptating because it's quick and often "good enough" but if you will treat the ensemble with the same care you should dedicate to the solos, then the result will be rewarding, the synth effect minimized to nothing, and the resulting musicality impressive.

Of course the need for detail, it depends on the use and orchestration: If you need more rough "naked" texture, layering with some more rough library can help, but the overlap of winds often is already so effective that you don't need any additional care, etc.


----------



## Vardaro

Bollen said:


> I disagree... Saxer is awesome in his ability, but the library sounds very synthy so far... And yes, I'm up for the challenge! The problem with us (MIDI people) is that we get so used to the artificial nature of all the software we use and we tend to forget what the real thing sounds like, hence why I try to go to live concerts at least a few times a month.


But I do play in, and listen to, string ensembles!

OK, the active musician is not _always_ the most critical of recording quality, 
but is _very _demanding where musicality and timbre are concernred.


----------



## Heinigoldstein

Vardaro said:


> But I do play in, and listen to, string ensembles!
> 
> OK, the active musician is not _always_ the most critical of recording quality,
> but is _very _demanding where musicality and timbre are concernred.


I think both of you are right. Performance-wise, S M instruments are unbeatable, but most examples I hear sound just too sterile for my ears. Same with my own attempts with S M brass. It really feels like playing the instrument, which is great, but I never can get rid of that kind of clinic impression sound-wise when I listen to it afterwards. Same with Saxers example. Obviously a very skilled musician, a fine piece of music and a great performance. But even this sounds a little too synth for me.


----------



## bun

Did anyone else expect applause at the end of Saxer's song? It really did come across as a real performance, even without perfectly realistic timbres.


----------



## germancomponist

The Sample Modeling Instruments controllers are similar to the control levers in an airplane. 
You have to learn both. If you are ready, then you can produce the best sounding music with it.


----------



## Bollen

Vardaro said:


> But I do play in, and listen to, string ensembles!
> 
> OK, the active musician is not _always_ the most critical of recording quality,
> but is _very _demanding where musicality and timbre are concernred.





Heinigoldstein said:


> I think both of you are right. Performance-wise, S M instruments are unbeatable, but most examples I hear sound just too sterile for my ears. Same with my own attempts with S M brass. It really feels like playing the instrument, which is great, but I never can get rid of that kind of clinic impression sound-wise when I listen to it afterwards. Same with Saxers example. Obviously a very skilled musician, a fine piece of music and a great performance. But even this sounds a little too synth for me.


That's it, precisely! SM performs incredibly musical, but the sound as in the timber is very synthy. I have the same problem with the trumpet sometimes. When it's very exposed, certain things just sound awfully artificial. In some parts it's due to the fact that certain controls do not have infinite variations (e.g. portamento or falls) so in certain contexts you're stuck either squeezing them in or cutting them short. In other parts it's because the lower dynamics sound heavily compressed and/or transitions all have this very obvious filter sound e.g. transition from vibrato to a shake or clean to flutter or growl and you'll hear this very synthy sound that kicks in between the two states.

This string library appears to have different issues, but so far the most obvious is that it sounds waaayyy too tight for a section. No real string section would sound so perfectly balanced (as in which players stand out) during runs and swells or decrescendos, the latter being the most obvious so far... Hence the most realistic thing I've ever heard has been made with dimensions strings when somebody has taken the trouble of programming all the individual strings separately.


----------



## Heinigoldstein

germancomponist said:


> The Sample Modeling Instruments controllers are similar to the control levers in an airplane.
> You have to learn both. If you are ready, then you can produce the best sounding music with it.


For me it all depends on the piece of music your're working on. Sometimes a realistic performance makes it sound "real", sometimes it's a great sound of a library. That's why I'll probably end up buying this library, even if I'm not convinced of the sound 100%. I have quite a few fantastic sounding string options, but none has the playability and controllability, that these strings seem to have.


----------



## TomaeusD

I sold my Xbox One X to afford this. It took me a matter of minutes to set up the breath controls, reverb and placement for all the ensembles, and then I did a quick demo of a certain melody that I couldn't get out of my head. I'm very happy with the capabilities of these strings. My only gripes so far with the ensembles are that the vibrato strength seems weak and inconsistent, portamento is a bit lacking, I can't quite reach a fortissimo that I'm happy with, and the extra articulations are not pronounced like I expected. Besides those things, I think I'll be using these quite a bit now, especially alongside CSS.


----------



## Vardaro

Dirtying?

There are already midi controllers for momentary pitchbends due to bow-pressure and finger-fall inaccuracy, as well for timbre irregularities in sustains, which I dont find in the other libraries.

But I would lile to see some subliminal _randomisation_ of vibrato amount, vibrato speed, and pitch: this would avoid any accusation of "synthiness".


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr

I would have kept the Xbox one..just joking.. But thanks for sharing. In theory the capabilities are great..in theory...yet I wish there will be some example/s coming where timbre and tone is at least a _little bit near of what I call a natural string sound_. There are also strange kind of phasing things going on or maybe its my ear, but in certain registers it starts to sound like not ensemble at all, more like solo instruments stacked on top of each other? But thanks for sharing, I appreciate that.


----------



## Heinigoldstein

Vardaro said:


> Dirtying?
> 
> There are already midi controllers for momentary pitchbends due to bow-pressure and finger-fall inaccuracy, as well for timbre irregularities in sustains, which I dont find in the other libraries.
> 
> But I would lile to see some subliminal _randomisation_ of vibrato amount, vibrato speed, and pitch: this would avoid any accusation of "synthiness".


True and all these controlls are great and you can do a lot of things you can't do with most other libraries. My engineering skills may be too limited, but I guess the problem is, you are dirtying a pretty clean sound . It's a fantastic performance option, but sonically it still sounds sterile to my ears very often. I'm very happy a developer is going that rout though, develops it further and gives us more options. For sure Peter will get my money. I just wish, both would be possible, performance AND sound......and peace on earth of course !


----------



## TomaeusD

AlexanderSchiborr said:


> I would have kept the Xbox one..just joking.. But thanks for sharing. In theory the capabilities are great..in theory...yet I wish there will be some example/s coming where timbre and tone is at least a _little bit near of what I call a natural string sound_. There are also strange kind of phasing things going on or maybe its my ear, but in certain registers it starts to sound like not ensemble at all, more like solo instruments stacked on top of each other? But thanks for sharing, I appreciate that.


I think you kind of have to accept them for what they are. They are basically solo instruments stacked on top of each other, just like a true ensemble (it's already setup and saves you a ton of hassle). It then allows for control of all acoustic factors that you wouldn't have with a sample library. It is a new achievement in physical modeling tech and obviously they'll keep improving it with updates. If you've used the brass, you should know that it has to start out dry and flexible. That's part of why I included a "dry as bones" sample to show how much some reverb and placement changes things. The amount of control and options is unparalleled, and that's also why I think it will pair well with other libraries, too. It's enlightening to finally try them for myself because I was far more critical of the sound until now. I bet you would be able to do some amazing things with it.


----------



## philippe goi

A solution to create even more realistic sets would be to superimpose two tracks of small sets and humanize them in a different way , I think this library is extraordinary , it will take time but future demos can dazzle us , THANKS SAMPLE MODELING


----------



## Bollen

philippe goi said:


> A solution to create even more realistic sets would be to superimpose two tracks of small sets and humanize them in a different way , I think this library is extraordinary , it will take time but future demos can dazzle us , THANKS SAMPLE MODELING


This is exactly what I'm waiting someone to do... I would also love to hear how 1 section sounds with randomisation (timing and pitch) set at maximum...


----------



## Fa

Bollen said:


> This is exactly what I'm waiting someone to do... I would also love to hear how 1 section sounds with randomisation (timing and pitch) set at maximum...


well, while layering ensembles is producing interesting results, actually if you push randomization what you get is just a band of poor musicians with poor instruments after drinking too much...


----------



## lychee

Sorry if I miss the answer somewhere in your posts, but is there a built-in randomization option in this library?


----------



## X-Bassist

Finally found the page that talks about the discount. Anyone remember a sale at SM? Ever? I own the Trumpet but never saw a sale besides an intro discount because I owned the Saxes (which are now Audio Modeling). I’m thinking this intro may be the only time to get it for $359. Which is about what I paid for Chris Hein Solo Strings bundle on sale, and that’s without ensembles. But it could be a bit more since the payment service takes a cut (don’t they have paypal?).

Intro ends Sept 30th, here is the rest of the info:

*How to obtain the 10% discount*
All Samplemodeling customers are entitled to a time-limited 10% discount on the purchase of our new Solo and Ensemble Strings.
*Please note that this offer expires on September 30 th , 2019.*
To obtain the discount code please send an email with the subject "Strings discount" to:
[email protected]
supplying the name and one serial number or license key of any product you purchased from Samplemodeling.
In return, you will get a personal, non transferable code number. It will allow you to purchase the Solo & Ensemble Strings for 359,- EUR instead of 399,- (+ VAT if applicable).

At least that gives you six weeks to save up.


----------



## justthere

Can anyone speak as to the DSP hunger of the instruments? I have a 12-Core 2013 Mac Pro. Id like to know how DSP usage compares between one instance of, say, Cellos at full density versus half; and how comfy a system is with running two instances of half-intensity per section all at once - that's 10 instances. For Divisi.


----------



## justthere

Nice work on the piece. Any thoughts I have about it don't concern the writing in any way.

I own the AM strings and have made ensembles out of them before - though it's hideously DSP-intensive, I've enjoyed the results greatly. I think my biggest complaint with either SM or AM is how Spiccato bow attacks come across, in particular with low strings - sort of grainy and low-resolution-sounding and lacking real power. And I'm also hearing in this a lack of definition in the low strings - they sound less like an ensemble and more like delay and chorus effects to me. And the other thing that all of these libraries need to work on is the IR's that they use - if that's the technique SM are using to give the instruments resonance - because there should be more wood sound in them. Are they adjustable for rosin amount and bow position as the AM ones are? 



Saxer said:


> I made a track using the strings in an orchestral arrangement. Here's a video showing the Logic session. First full mix and the second half is strings only.


----------



## Fa

justthere said:


> Can anyone speak as to the DSP hunger of the instruments? I have a 12-Core 2013 Mac Pro. Id like to know how DSP usage compares between one instance of, say, Cellos at full density versus half; and how comfy a system is with running two instances of half-intensity per section all at once - that's 10 instances. For Divisi.


I have a 4core 2013 mac Pro and I'm playing 10 instances with no problems. There is almost no difference between full density and half density from DSP point of view, they run pretty similar processing, being not a build-up of layers the way of increasing density.


----------



## Fa

lychee said:


> Sorry if I miss the answer somewhere in your posts, but is there a built-in randomization option in this library?


actually several. The scripts have an AI humanization always running in background, based on musical context, but lot of parameters are available to the user to operate in real time via MIDI changes to the humanization factors.


----------



## germancomponist

I'm experimenting with the library for 2 days now, and I'm thrilled! World class! My Faforit was previously CSS, and now I find that the SM strings to fit extremely well and that both libraries complement each other wonderful.


----------



## servandus

Hi there. This is my first post in this forum. I have been learning a lot from many discussions here at vi-control for some time, but never had the chance to contribute with something which could be useful to others.

I purchased SM strings yesterday, spent some time today playing and experimenting with it, and I'm amazed by the library. They've really come up with something unique. A lot to learn of course (SM is all about skill and control after all, almost like a real instrument), but I was really surprised by the playability of the library.

This is the solo vioin, for example, played in real time with a breath controller (only some minor velocity adjustments in the editor). Three short excerpts, from low to high register:



I didn't have the time to go through the manual yet, but I'm familiar with SM brass, so I messed around a bit with the timbral shaping, and found something which might be closer to a baroque sound, with less bow preassure, and playing with a shorter phrasing, just a tiny bit of emphatic vibrato, always quick and feeble:



Again, everything played in real time except the vibrato, which was added later in the midi editor beacuse, in this case, it's not linked to the dynamics as such, so it could not be performed along with CC11 by the breath controller.

I wonder what will be possible to achieve with this library once we learn to use it properly


----------



## justthere

You may want to look at the TEControl BC2. I often use a configuration of pressure for dynamics, bite for vibrato amount, head nod for vibrato speed, and head tilt for bow position. That’s with AM Strings, of course.



servandus said:


> Hi there. This is my first post in this forum. I have been learning a lot from many discussions here at vi-control for some time, but never had the chance to contribute with something which could be useful to others.
> 
> I purchased SM strings yesterday, spent some time today playing and experimenting with it, and I'm amazed by the library. They've really come up with something unique. A lot to learn of course (SM is all about skill and control after all, almost like a real instrument), but I was really surprised by the playability of the library.
> 
> This is the solo vioin, for example, played in real time with a breath controller (only some minor velocity adjustments in the editor). Three short excerpts, from low to high register:
> 
> 
> 
> I didn't have the time to go through the manual yet, but I'm familiar with SM brass, so I messed around a bit with the timbral shaping, and found something which might be closer to a baroque sound, with less bow preassure, and playing with a shorter phrasing, just a tiny bit of emphatic vibrato, always quick and feeble:
> 
> 
> 
> Again, everything played in real time except the vibrato, which was added later in the midi editor beacuse, in this case, it's not linked to the dynamics as such, so it could not be performed along with CC11 by the breath controller.
> 
> I wonder what will be possible to achieve with this library once we learn to use it properly


----------



## Nicola74

germancomponist said:


> I'm experimenting with the library for 2 days now, and I'm thrilled! World class! My Faforit was previously CSS, and now I find that the SM strings to fit extremely well and that both libraries complement each other wonderful.


Good to know! And about the sound itself?


----------



## germancomponist

Nicola74 said:


> And about the sound itself?



The sound is absolutely great and sooo flexible! This is because it is recorded dry and you can use any reverb you like. No baked in reverb in the samples, fantastic! I know no other library what is so flexible, soundwise, and in any way.


----------



## servandus

justthere said:


> You may want to look at the TEControl BC2. I often use a configuration of pressure for dynamics, bite for vibrato amount, head nod for vibrato speed, and head tilt for bow position. That’s with AM Strings, of course.



I knew about the bite feature of the TEC-BC2, but not about the head nod and tilt controllers. I use a MBC1, which works well, but gets the breath only. So, thanks for mentioning it.

Also, to answer your question about rosin and bow position, SM strings seems to work differently to AM on that. There's a dedicated controller for bow noise, and an overtone controller that lets you imitate the characteristic effect of a brief imbalance between bow speed and bow pressure, but the bow preassure itself seems to be linked to the interplay of CC11 and velocity. There's no flautando, sul pont. or sul tasto controllers either, although with C11=0 the ensemble strings have a lovely ppp which is for sure played sul tasto (you can hear it in the Bach excerpt). I wonder if SM has plans to add these techniques in future releases. Harmonics sound nice, but a slow, wide portamento on them does not trigger the seagull effect, but an artificial portamento impossible to achieve in real strings... I mean, there's still a lot of things which could be implemented on this library, but to me it seems the ideal platform/engine to try to simulate all these playing techniques. I think it's a terrific new approach to modeling strings. Let's see to what extent they can move things forward.


----------



## Vardaro

Hmm. Apart from Mahler's adagios, I find audible portamentos should not be used more than twice a week!
We classical players strive for hours to eliminate these sounds, by effecting the slide with finger contact but zero finger pressure..

Anyway, the tone is fabulous.


----------



## servandus

😆 Even once a week, just in case! Yes, of course, what I meant is that the library doesn't behave like a real string instrument when playing harmonics. If you're playing ordinario, an interval wide enough played with a low velocity triggers a "portamento" that actually resembles a true glissando on the same string (not only due to the width of the interval, but also to the slower speed with which is executed). However, if you do the same while playing harmonics, you don't get a seagull glissando like in a real instrument, but kind of an artificial "glissando ordinario with harmonics", to put it somehow.

On the other hand, I find simulating quick position changes in fast passages quite challenging, because I can't find a way to get a fast, clean pitch shift without making it slower. What's great about SM or AM instruments, however, is that you can actually think about those things which are absolutely impossible to get with other sample libraries. And I agree with you, the tone of these SM strings is beautiful (I'm less seduced by the solo cello, though, even if it's also quite nice). A great library which makes me dream about future possibilities.


----------



## Vardaro

Ensembles.
I compared the violin total sample sizes of Samplemodeling, Embertone, and Chris Hein.
SM: Solo 2.29GB; Ensemble 8.66GB; in fact we see a "multi" of 4 violins.
(It is even possble to delete up to 2 of them....)
ET: Solo 1.78GB; Ensembles must be entirely scripted?
CH: Solo 4.75GB; Scripted ensembles again.
CH: Ensemble library 7.32GB, so a stack of 2 plus scripting?
Interesting?

Note transitions.
I have yet to explore portamenti, but in all the demos I find the fast runs the best I have ever heard in a VI string instrument, and I think this is without "shorts" samples.


----------



## Bollen

Fa said:


> well, while layering ensembles is producing interesting results, actually if you push randomization what you get is just a band of poor musicians with poor instruments after drinking too much...



I'd love to hear that! It's something that has many real world applications...


----------



## germancomponist

Bollen said:


> I'd love to hear that! It's something that has many real world applications...


----------



## Heinigoldstein

Fa said:


> well, while layering ensembles is producing interesting results, actually if you push randomization what you get is just a band of poor musicians with poor instruments after drinking too much...


Pushing realism to the next level !


----------



## germancomponist

ka00 said:


> Thanks for this demonstration. For some reason, this is the only example that has me intrigued by this library. I can’t explain why the tone sounds better here than other examples.
> 
> Could be that layering with other sections from CSS could yield fantastic results.


Layering with other sections from CSS is great.


----------



## PerryD

ka00 said:


> Thanks for this demonstration. For some reason, this is the only example that has me intrigued by this library. I can’t explain why the tone sounds better here than other examples.
> 
> Could be that layering with other sections from CSS could yield fantastic results.


 I want to do a video showing actual real time playing on my keyboard. Maybe I will do a single SM Violin ensemble and have an entirely independent part on a separate track with CSS. Not layered but just to show the potential blend between the two.


----------



## PerryD

I'll try as soon as the thunderstorm passes here in Georgia. :/


----------



## prodigalson

ka00 said:


> Thanks for this demonstration. For some reason, this is the only example that has me intrigued by this library. I can’t explain why the tone sounds better here than other examples.
> 
> Could be that layering with other sections from CSS could yield fantastic results.



This sounds really good. I've been trying to put my finger on what exactly it is that I'm missing from the tone of SM strings. I think it's the fact that there's a silkiness, a softness around the edges that is really nice on lower dynamics but still seems present even when their clearly playing FF. I don't hear the bite and clear sound of the upper partials of rosin and bow on string you get when string players are really digging in. Anyway, for me, I think that's it...


----------



## Vardaro

..a bit like the Vienna Philharmonic, you mean?.....


----------



## servandus

I guess that's exactly the question here: are we talking about the live sound of the Vienna Philharmonic as if you we were listening to them in the Musikverein, or are we talking about the recording of the same orchestra in the same Hall as it sounds in your room/headphones? Because it's two completely different things. Worlds apart, in fact.

I think we're experimenting kind of a "cognitive dissonance" when we hear these new SM strings, because it's a bit like feeling the silky sound of live strings in a concert hall when we're expecting to hear the bite, clear, almost supernatural presence and detail of top string recordings. It's shocking, because it's like going to a concert, and start listening to the strings as if they were in your headphones... but exactly the other way around.

I've spent two afternoons messing around with the library, and I'm having so much fun with its playability and responsiveness that I'm somehow overlooking this issue, but let me post an example to illustrate what I mean. It's one of the pieces I've tried with the library this past couple of days, Sakamoto's Rain from the Last Emperor (a soundtrack I love). Please take it as it is, a quick, unpolished sketch. I might dedicate a little more time on this to try the effect of the ensemble size CC to simulate divisi, the bow sound CC to simulate presence, etc. and also use external pos/reverb for the mix, but for now I'm just having fun going over some midi files, blowing my breath controller as if I was "conducting" the piece... and enjoying it like a child, I should say 😆



I hear that sound, and I love that sound, because it reminds me of the tone experienced in a concert hall... but actually, headphones on, I can't help having the feeling that they're playing con sordini. And I can't get rid of that silky sound, no matter how far I push the velocities. Anyway, I think that those of us fortunate enough to be exposed to the sound of live strings on a regular basis will resonate better with the overall tone of this library.

I'll keep trying things, and post some more polished example if it's worth sharing.


----------



## TomaeusD

@servandus I absolutely love that track - it's my favorite from the score. You did a great job here, on a first pass especially. I think what sticks out to me most are the harmonics toward the end, which I'm not sure how much control we have over the sound of them. I can't wait to see how you add to it! This is a testament to how these strings can lay a foundation and if you choose you can fill in with other libraries according to their strengths.


----------



## servandus

TomaeusD said:


> @servandus I absolutely love that track - it's my favorite from the score. You did a great job here, on a first pass especially. I think what sticks out to me most are the harmonics toward the end, which I'm not sure how much control we have over the sound of them. I can't wait to see how you add to it! This is a testament to how these strings can lay a foundation and if you choose you can fill in with other libraries according to their strengths.



Yes, the score is a gem, and this one might also be my favourite track. The harmonics in the library are absolutely stunning, both in sound and responsiveness (no other strings that I own come even close to what you can play with this; I could even say it's one of the strenghts of the library). If they could implement seagull glissandi in future releases, I'll be in heaven. I'm sure the library has still some hidden wonders I'm not aware of, but, for now, I'd say it has the best runs, the best and more flexible bowing simulation and the best harmonics I've ever come across in an ensemble string library. 

Nice strings, no doubt. I will now try to piss them off, to see how aggressive they can get


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

servandus said:


> Yes, the score is a gem, and this one might also be my favourite track. The harmonics in the library are absolutely stunning, both in sound and responsiveness (no other strings that I own come even close to what you can play with this; I could even say it's one of the strenghts of the library). If they could implement seagull glissandi in future releases, I'll be in heaven. I'm sure the library has still some hidden wonders I'm not aware of, but, for now, I'd say it has the best runs, the best and more flexible bowing simulation and the best harmonics I've ever come across in an ensemble string library.
> 
> Nice strings, no doubt. I will now try to piss them off, to see how aggressive they can get



Why should we become aggressive?. We explored a new path. The results are at least decent. And they will become even better in a next future.


----------



## Vardaro

servandus said:


> Anyway, I think that those of us fortunate enough to be exposed to the sound of live strings on a regular basis will resonate better with the overall tone of this library.


That's exactly what I like about them!


----------



## TomaeusD

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> Why should we become aggressive?. We explored a new path. The results are at least decent. And they will become even better in a next future.


I think servandus was referring to the strings themselves - metaphorically making the strings angry to bring about a more biting tone.


----------



## servandus

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> Why should we become aggressive?. We explored a new path. The results are at least decent. And they will become even better in a next future.



🤣 No idea: go ask Bartok, Stravinsky, & Co. 😆 Yes, of course I was referring to the string sound. I meant "aggressive" in a musical context, and in a friendly way... like in a Roma-Barcelona, or Juve-Madrid match 😜 I'm sorry if my "spanglish" sounds weird sometimes. I'm becoming one of SM's tifosi anyway 

I can only imagine how many hours of research went into this library, which I find unique and revolutionary in many different ways, so kudos for being adventurous and exploring new territory. And, although I applaud your modesty, I honestly wouldn't use the word "decent" to describe what I'm hearing: it's much closer to outstanding, to say the truth, more in the line of "how the hell have they done this?". 

But what I like most in your post is the last sentence  Please, do work further in this library. If you want me to, I can give you a whishlist to have you occupied for two or three lifetimes 😆 Now seriously, congratulations on this library. It's not decent at all, it's fantastic.

Now, with your permission, I'm going to tease your strings a bit... you know, just to check if they can "bite" a little  I'm sure they can.



Vardaro said:


> That's exactly what I like about them!



+1


----------



## JEPA

from what I hear this could be the most flexible string library to date, but the sound in my personal view like others views is that is lacking some realism. I want to praise this library, is a great achievement.

What I hear from the demos:
- The ATTACK of the first notes (not the legato, but the bow attack on the string) is lacking realism, maybe a chaos generator for the attacks? for different attacks?
- The ensemble strings, a real ensemble would have diversity of instruments, woods, luthier designers have build the instruments with different shapes, the strings are from different providers, some strings are older than others, some bows are stressed slight different, etc. This library is lacking of this realism, that's because to my ears it sounds too homogeneous, it lacks diversity, the little grains that are different, the chaotic aleatoric crispy sounds from bowing and attacking the strings.

This are my personal views, and I can be totally wrong, but that is what I hear.

all best, and keep modelling, awesome work!
Jorge


----------



## prodigalson

servandus said:


> I think we're experimenting kind of a "cognitive dissonance" when we hear these new SM strings, because it's a bit like feeling the silky sound of live strings in a concert hall when we're expecting to hear the bite, clear, almost supernatural presence and detail of top string recordings. It's shocking, because it's like going to a concert, and start listening to the strings as if they were in your headphones... but exactly the other way around.



You might well be right, though I imagine most of us here are trying to make recordings that sound like recordings and not like the hypothetical experience of listening to the Vienna Philharmonic live in a specific concert hall.


----------



## servandus

prodigalson said:


> You might well be right, though I imagine most of us here are trying to make recordings that sound like recordings and not like the hypothetical experience of listening to the Vienna Philharmonic live in a specific concert hall.



Sure. That's why most of us need virtual instruments: to make them sound like good recordings. To listen to the real thing we need orchestras and concert halls (and tickets), not samples 

It's funny, because with SM brass we were looking for a way of getting rid of its edge to make the instruments sit nicely in an orchestral mix, and now with the strings we're asking for a way to make them sound more edgy... If I was a developer, I'd kill us all 🤣


----------



## leon chevalier

servandus said:


> SM brass we were looking for a way of getting rid of its edge to make the instruments sit nicely in an orchestral mix, and now with the strings we're asking for a way to make them sound more edgy


Very true ! That's funny !


----------



## I like music

servandus said:


> Sure. That's why most of us need virtual instruments: to make them sound like good recordings. To listen to the real thing we need orchestras and concert halls (and tickets), not samples
> 
> It's funny, because with SM brass we were looking for a way of getting rid of its edge to make the instruments sit nicely in an orchestral mix, and now with the strings we're asking for a way to make them sound more edgy... If I was a developer, I'd kill us all 🤣



Hah, I'd want to kill us all too. We _do_ ask for a lot.


----------



## FriFlo

servandus said:


> Yes, of course, what I meant is that the library doesn't behave like a real string instrument when playing harmonics. If you're playing ordinario, an interval wide enough played with a low velocity triggers a "portamento" that actually resembles a true glissando on the same string (not only due to the width of the interval, but also to the slower speed with which is executed). However, if you do the same while playing harmonics, you don't get a seagull glissando like in a real instrument, but kind of an artificial "glissando ordinario with harmonics", to put it somehow.


I don’t have the library (yet) and this might be a misunderstanding, but usually, string harmonics are played with two fingers - so called artificial harmonics. With these you can play every pitch as a flageolet and you can also do a glissando on each of the 4 strings with the given range. The SM version of this may not sound realistic (it actually does not on any of the other SM instruments I have), but the seagull effect or harmonic glissando as used Stravinskys firebird is a special sound produced by just one finger sliding over any of the strings. It triggers the full series of overtones in a specific pattern. Just wanting to make sure, we are talking about the same thing here, as I am interested in buying these strings.


----------



## mikeh-375

FriFlo said:


> I don’t have the library (yet) and this might be a misunderstanding, but usually, string harmonics are played with two fingers - so called artificial harmonics. With these you can play every pitch as a flageolet and you can also do a glissando on each of the 4 strings with the given range. The SM version of this may not sound realistic (it actually does not on any of the other SM instruments I have), but the seagull effect or harmonic glissando as used Stravinskys firebird is a special sound produced by just one finger sliding over any of the strings. It triggers the full series of overtones in a specific pattern. Just wanting to make sure, we are talking about the same thing here, as I am interested in buying these strings.



There are nodes that give natural harmonics too, played with one finger. Not relevant but just fyi @FriFlo as they are used just as much and offer many possibilities.


----------



## Vardaro

..and if we slide our one (unpressed) finger between these "natural" harmonics, we dont' get a slide, but a fuzzy mess with maybe some other hartmonics on the way...


----------



## FriFlo

mikeh-375 said:


> There are nodes that give natural harmonics too, played with one finger. Not relevant but just fyi @FriFlo as they are used just as much and offer many possibilities.


You mean natural harmonics? Sure, they offer many alternatives. I was just thinking about what I would expect from a harmonic portamento in a string library in the first place ... and I think it would be sliding artificial harmonics before the seagull effect.


----------



## servandus

Exactly. The keyswitch for harmonics in SM strings seems to be triggering only artificial harmonics, and the portamento between them is brilliantly done. As a said earlier, no other library that I own come even close to what you can do with SM when it comes to harmonics. Maybe in the future they could add a natural harmonic keyswitch, and then the slide would trigger the seagull effect as in a real instrument.


----------



## mikeh-375

FriFlo said:


> You mean natura harmonics? Sure, they offer many alternatives. I was just thinking about what I would expect from a harmonic portamento in a string library in the first place ... and I think it would be sliding artificial harmonics before the seagull effect.


fair do's...I mentioned it because of the way you phrased your post. I've used the pitch wheel with VSL to get gliss harmonics which worked quite well over a limited distance, but I digress...


----------



## servandus

Just to clarify.

This is how SM harmonics behave:



These two other effects are not yet possible with the library:


----------



## mikeh-375

@servandus, can you play them sul pont and trem (or both at the same time) and how loud/quite can they convincingly go? I don't suppose there is pizz harmonics too is there?


----------



## servandus

The library doesn't let you control the position of the bow over the strings, so you can't play sul tasto or sul pont bowings yet. But it might be possible to combine the tremolo and harmonics keyswitches. I'm not in my studio right now, but I'll check it later and let you know.


----------



## mikeh-375

thnx Servandus


----------



## FriFlo

servandus said:


> The library doesn't let you control the position of the bow over the strings, so you can't play sul tasto or sul pont bowings yet. But it might be possible to combine the tremolo and harmonics keyswitches. I'm not in my studio right now, but I'll check it later and let you know.


I would be interesting to know, if Giorgio might possibly have spoken about these omissions, when he recently wrote about SM Strings getting "even better in a next future" ...!?


----------



## Vardaro

Thankyou Servandus for the videos. Duly downloaded!


----------



## servandus

@mikeh-375 No, you can't play tremolo and hamonics simultaneously. And when I tried to simulate a tremolo by rebowing fast enough, you get back from harmonics to ordinario as soon as you press the sustain pedal or the rebow/détaché keyswitch. So, it's not only tremolo, rebowing doesn't work either when you're playing harmonics (and, by the way, the tremolo sounds weird to me even playing ord.)

@Vardaro You're welcome. You know that when it comes to these kind of techniques (harmonics, flageolet tones, natural, artificial, open, stopped, etc.), the terminology is sometimes used/translated differently in different countries, so better a video than thousand words.


----------



## Sam Reed

FriFlo said:


> the seagull effect or harmonic glissando as used Stravinskys firebird is a special sound produced by just one finger sliding over any of the strings. It triggers the full series of overtones in a specific pattern.



I was a little confused by servandus' post as well, and I too thought I must be misunderstanding something he was saying. [EDIT: removing some stuff which in hindsight was carelessly-worded enough that it might seem like I'm telling FriFlo things he clearly already knows, which was not my intention. I was using the general 'you' but it easily might have sounded like I was referring to one personally specifically; mea culpa.]

These are the harmonic glissando techniques I'm aware of:

1) The glissando on the natural harmonics of an open string, as described in the portion of your post I quoted above. [EDIT: Servandus explains later in the thread that some people do casually refer to this as "seagull", though in my experience that term is reserved for #3 below.]

2) The glissando on artificial harmonics, which in orchestral music is almost always produced via the "touch 4th" method. Because the space between intervals gets smaller as one plays higher on the string, touch-4th harmonics require the player to constantly adjust the spacing between the stopping finger and the node-touching finger, to maintain the distance of a fourth. If a melody is written in artificial harmonics, you will hear a lot of un-notated micro-portamenti even from the best players, because this technique is akin to playing a melody with one finger. If a touch-4th artificial harmonic glissando is notated, the default sound produced, absent any additional special instructions, will be a smooth, continuous pitch shift, just like a stopped glissando but in harmonics.

3) Seagull harmonic glissandi are accomplished when the player does _not_ change the spacing of their fingers to maintain "touch-4th" but instead keeps the distance between fingers constant. Thus as the fingers traverse the strings and the spacing of intervals consequently narrows or widens, the node touched is not always the 4th, producing the seagull effect.


I'm not familiar with the library yet, but it's my understanding that it should be able to emulate #1 by playing the appropriate notes from the overtone series. From servandus' post, it sounds like #2 (both the glissando example and the melody on harmonics example) can be accomplished by playing at low velocities. There are far more examples of these techniques in the literature than there are of #3.

It doesn't sound like #3 is possible with the current version of this library -- but does anyone know of _any_ library that offers seagull harmonic glissandi? If so, please fill me in. Perhaps xSample might have it for soloists, but I'm hoping seagull glissandi played by entire sections are available somewhere. (I wouldn't be surprised if no one offers this, however –– it's a very fun effect but definitely something to be employed very sparingly or it will lose its impact; it may not be worth the inve$tment to offer such techniques in a traditional (not sample-modeled) library.)

The manual for this library says "harmonics, artificial and natural" ... but it doesn't seem to say how the player specifies which one they want. Can someone who owns the library fill me in how one specifies natural harmonics? It may not matter in the virtual world, but in the real world the difference in sound between natural and artificial harmonics is not-insignificant, and they are best used in different contexts (and combining them together is unsatisfactory).

Disclaimer: it has been many years since I last played the cello, and I was never a virtuoso. If anything I've said here is mistaken or incomplete, I hope string players will correct or amplify so that we all may learn.

p.s. btw Fritz, I really get a kick out of that JW action figure every time I see one of your posts. I wish it wasn't just a mockup but was actually available for purchase


----------



## Sam Reed

Oops, a lot of posts came in while I was typing. You guys have it covered already!


----------



## Sam Reed

FriFlo said:


> I would be interesting to know, if Giorgio might possibly have spoken about these omissions, when he recently wrote about SM Strings getting "even better in a next future" ...!?



I'm hoping the same thing ... but also that things like sul ponticello, sul tasto, etc. will also be available sooner rather than later. There are a plethora of techniques possible on real world instruments, and it would probably be prohibitive to sample them all the traditional way. But the samplemodeling approach means it's possible to eventually come very close to mimicking the real instrument even in extreme situations (e.g., pizzicato sul ponticello con sordino). Put another way: samplemodeling's approach comes closest to the ideal of writing, then subsequently mocking up a virtual performance, rather than being forced into "writing to the samples" to a greater or lesser extent.


----------



## Vardaro

Until Version 2.x (!) perhaps we can "play at seagulls" with separate "artificial harmonic" notes and pitcbends?


----------



## Sam Reed

Vardaro said:


> ..and if we slide our one (unpressed) finger between these "natural" harmonics, we dont' get a slide, but a fuzzy mess with maybe some other hartmonics on the way...



But quite a beautiful fuzzy mess! Especially when an entire section does it ad libitum.


----------



## Sam Reed

Vardaro said:


> Until Version 2.x (!) perhaps we can "play at seagulls" with separate "artificial harmonic" notes and pitcbends?



If you try it let us know how it turns out! Nonetheless, I'm sure Peter & Giorgio always prefer (read: will settle for nothing less) that every technique officially offered in their instruments be playable in real time. (Maybe I'm misunderstanding the workaround you're describing, but it sounds like it would require stitching together a bunch of separately-laid-down snippets to emulate a fast seagull gliss? ... either that or you're _much_ more coordinated than I am!)


----------



## Sam Reed

Has anyone who already owns the library played around at all with getting a traditional Celtic fiddle sound? The almost-no-vibrato part should be easy enough, but I'm curious if the "raspy" bowing style (deliberately not as smooth as possible, somewhat mimicking the sound of the chanter on the uilleann or highland pipes) is easily obtainable?

Somewhat related, but back to the classical genre: the manual says there's a controller for "bow noise" but is that the appropriate parameter to try to emulate "at the frog" and punta d'arco?


----------



## mikeh-375

servandus said:


> @mikeh-375 No, you can't play tremolo and hamonics simultaneously. And when I tried to simulate a tremolo by rebowing fast enough, you get back from harmonics to ordinario as soon as you press the sustain pedal or the rebow/détaché keyswitch. So, it's not only tremolo, rebowing doesn't work either when you're playing harmonics (and, by the way, the tremolo sounds weird to me even playing ord.)
> 
> @Vardaro You're welcome. You know that when it comes to these kind of techniques (harmonics, flageolet tones, natural, artificial, open, stopped, etc.), the terminology is sometimes used/translated differently in different countries, so better a video than thousand words.



Thanks for that Servandus, very useful info to know before making a decision.


----------



## pmcrockett

Having started to play around with the library, I'm really intrigued by the possibilities presented by the timbral shaping parameters, which allow you to mess with the overtones in realtime. Hasn't really been brought up at all in this thread yet. I'm using one of the motion sensing TEC breath controllers, and mapping overtones to nod/tilt and then bobbing my head where I want accents seems to be helping with performance liveliness. Stuff like getting a cutting, focused sound on attacks and then backing away to a duller sustain or increasing brilliance across an upward run.

Easily the most playable string library I've ever used, to the extent that even if I were ultimately going to use a different library for a mockup, I'd consider doing the initial recording with this and then mimicking that performance when programming with the final library.


----------



## I like music

pmcrockett said:


> Having started to play around with the library, I'm really intrigued by the possibilities presented by the timbral shaping parameters, which allow you to mess with the overtones in realtime. Hasn't really been brought up at all in this thread yet. I'm using one of the motion sensing TEC breath controllers, and mapping overtones to nod/tilt and then bobbing my head where I want accents seems to be helping with performance liveliness. Stuff like getting a cutting, focused sound on attacks and then backing away to a duller sustain or increasing brilliance across an upward run.
> 
> Easily the most playable string library I've ever used, to the extent that even if I were ultimately going to use a different library for a mockup, I'd consider doing the initial recording with this and then mimicking that performance when programming with the final library.



Ah, didn't even know about this parameter. When you say 'helping with performance liveliness' I'm guessing this point also bleeds into the actual tone of the strings? A number of people were asking about whether the library can get that 'bite' you might get at ff etc and I wondered if you found that it helped in that respect?


----------



## TomaeusD

I might be missing something, but does anyone know why CC17 (general purpose) is linked to expression/volume when it's not activated for any of the parameters and it's not mentioned at all in the manual?


----------



## servandus

Hi, guys. Attached is a file where you can hear:

1) {0:00} an excerpt of M. Rózsa's violin concerto to illustrate what I mean when I say that no other library that I own manages harmonics like SM does. It feels like magic to play...

2) {0:12}... so like magic, that you can easily get "impossible harmonic glissandi" out of this library



Sam Reed said:


> I was a little confused by servandus' post as well, and I too thought I must be misunderstanding something he was saying. No offense, but I think there might be a misunderstanding in your post as well (or I misunderstood when reading you).



Yes, I was too lazy to explain  Let's do it for the sake of clarity, so that those who don't have the library can better understand what we're talking about here. The first note of the glissando is a g4, which is only available in the violin as a the first natural harmonic of the G string. Well, if you start in that note, and slide along the string in a real violin you would get a "Firebird" glissando (let's call it that way for clarity: in Spanish we call it "natural harmonic glissando", and (as I think you do in Enlglish) refer to it sometimes casually as a "seagull" glissando, although seagulls proper only appear, as you rightly said, when you do what we call "an artificial harmonic glissando" but without adjusting the 4th interval along the string). Well, what you get, as you can hear in the file, is not a Firebird gliss. but a "fake ordinario gliss. with harmonics" as I put it in my first post, i.e. the type of glissando you could get if the first g4 was available as an artificial harmonic. I hope it's more clear now.



Sam Reed said:


> The manual for this library says "harmonics, artificial and natural" ... but it doesn't seem to say how the player specifies which one they want. Can someone who owns the library fill me in how one specifies natural harmonics?



Natural, artificial... and they forgot to mention the "impossible harmonics" (ab4, a4, sib4, etc.). It's so nice to have them  To answer your question, there's no way to choose between natural or artificial. There're just "harmonics"; all fall into the category of "beautiful, SM harmonics".

3) {0:19} the dynamic range of some harmonics



mikeh-375 said:


> @servandus, can you play them sul pont and trem (or both at the same time) and how loud/quite can they convincingly go? I don't suppose there is pizz harmonics too is there?



Very nice dynamic range as you can hear. And no, there's no pizz. harmonics.

4) {0:44} Fiddling with the detaché keyswitch, bow speed/pressure controlled by CC11/velocity, note length not relevant (the detaché keyswitch works like the sustain pedal)



Sam Reed said:


> Has anyone who already owns the library played around at all with getting a traditional Celtic fiddle sound? The almost-no-vibrato part should be easy enough, but I'm curious if the "raspy" bowing style (deliberately not as smooth as possible, somewhat mimicking the sound of the chanter on the uilleann or highland pipes) is easily obtainable?



I'm afraid that I'm not familiar with traditional Celtic music to do a decent job here, but I think you can draw some conclussions listening to these examples. I hope so, at least. No vib. at all here. As you can hear, the detaché is nice and light, although in high velocities triggers always exactly the same bow change noise, something that produces kind of a "machine gun effect" just by that noise. A little randomization/variation in the spectrum and, above all, amplitude of that noise would be highly welcome to avoid monotony. This bow noise I'm talking about doesn't seem to change at all with the "bow noise CC", which does affect the timbre of the note as you bow along the string. Is quite noticeable and nice to have this under control. I couldn't play this in real time even if you give me $1000... (well, maybe I could try). Seriously, I think this kind of things have to be edited.

5) {0:54} Fiddling without the detaché keyswitch, bow speed/pressure controlled by CC11/velocity AND note length (extremely important, imo)

Also non vib. You get rid of that detaché noise when you play ordinario in this way. It feels very natural to play like that in real time. But if you edit your performance further, you really can do wonders. By the way, I think I don't need more edge in the solo instruments. They can be as "aggressive" as I could possibly need.

I hope you find this useful. After having fun with the library for a couple of days, I'm beginning to dig deeper in it. And this is SM: there's a world to learn in this library. So many things in your hands that can change the tone and behaviour drastically (as *pmcrockett *says, the timbral shaping is something to spend some time with. I did not try real time control, but you can change the tone of the instrument in some incredible ways. In fact, if you lower all bars to the min. you can hear something quite near to con sordino).

But I think, the more interesting thing I could share with you is: BEWARE, wind players! The instruments react really, really well to CC curves that mimic the gesture of a real bowing on the string. I notice that in a big way with these examples because of the non vib. If you blow your breath controller as you do with a wind instrument, you're going to witness the birth of a new criature that sometimes resembles an accordion, and sometimes just a sonic Frankenstein. If you articulate with the tongue, the detaché attacks you get are not aggressive; instead, they become utterly unrealistic. Similarly, if you, try to control the overall dynamic arc with your breath and trust your fingers to shape the internal phrasing, it may work very well for lyrical lines or slow bowings, but it won't let you control fast bow movements in a realistic way. It depends much on the musical context and the articulation you're using (ord., det., harm. etc). Sometimes is very subtle, but maybe because of my familiarity with string instruments, I find it quite dramatic.

Anyway, I hope this could be of some help to you.


----------



## Vardaro

[/QUOTE]


servandus said:


> If you articulate with the tongue, the detaché attacks you get are not aggressive; instead, they become utterly unrealistic.


Does the length of the controller absorb the attacks?
I found this trying to imitate a bandoneon style on a melodica (!!!); I had to put the mouthpiece directly on the melodica rather than via the flexible tube.

Would a "breath controller" be better than a "wind controller"?


----------



## Vardaro

How easy will it be to "create" a non-phasey solo violin II for a string quartet?


----------



## mikeh-375

Fabulous efforts on our behalf Servandus, thank you.


----------



## Fa

TomaeusD said:


> I might be missing something, but does anyone know why CC17 (general purpose) is linked to expression/volume when it's not activated for any of the parameters and it's not mentioned at all in the manual?


Some controllers are used for internal script communication. Other are available for regulation, but are still connected/linked for AI of scripts activity.


----------



## Fa

Vardaro said:


> How easy will it be to "create" a non-phasey solo violin II for a string quartet?


as easy as picking a different body IR, and in case of unison, using little detuning or even better little pitch band variations. (usually 2 to 5 cents variations).


----------



## Fa

Vardaro said:


> Does the length of the controller absorb the attacks?
> I found this trying to imitate a bandoneon style on a melodica (!!!); I had to put the mouthpiece directly on the melodica rather than via the flexible tube.
> 
> Would a "breath controller" be better than a "wind controller"?


in my experience yes it can do it (some breath controller as well having a tube). But it depends on the quality of the device, and the sensitivity set-up of course.


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

TomaeusD said:


> I might be missing something, but does anyone know why CC17 (general purpose) is linked to expression/volume when it's not activated for any of the parameters and it's not mentioned at all in the manual?


TomaeusD, 

CC12, CC13 and CC17 are for internal use only. They will be shielded from the external world with the next update. Sorry for the inconvenience.


----------



## Sam Reed

Hi servandus,

Thanks so much for taking the time to make those examples! It's very helpful. I enjoyed the Rózsa excerpt. It's been a long time since I heard that work and you've inspired me to listen to it again soon.




servandus said:


> The first note of the glissando is a g4, which is only available in the violin as a the first natural harmonic of the G string.



Thank you for this and the following explanations, it clarifies a lot! (Though I wish there weren't two standards re: what to number middle C; it gets to be such a headache when every developer picks a different one! I have to make a lot of cheat sheets when preparing things like expression maps.)




servandus said:


> in Spanish we call it "natural harmonic glissando", and (as I think you do in Enlglish) refer to it sometimes casually as a "seagull" glissando


We call it "natural harmonic glissando" in English too (or very occasionally, I've heard some people say "open harmonic glissando"). Personally I've never heard these types of glissandi referred to as "seagull" but it's valuable to know that some people do; may prevent confusion at a future conversation!




servandus said:


> Natural, artificial... and they forgot to mention the "impossible harmonics" (ab4, a4, sib4, etc.). It's so nice to have them



:emoji_juggling:🙃 I can see both sides ... I understand that many people want to do sound design or overcome "limitations" of the real instruments. But for me personally, I wish every library offered your choice between: one option which pleases the people just mentioned, and one designed for weirdos like me who don't want their virtual instruments to be capable of anything the real world instruments can't do. 🤣 (In fact I would pay extra for such a feature, especially if some of the unique/performance difficulties of real instruments (quirky limitations which are unique to each instrument and to the specific register one is playing in) were incorporated to an extent ... not enough to be frustrating, but just enough that you never run into the blatantly/cartoonishly impossible, even when your stupid cat walks across the keyboard.)




servandus said:


> 3) {0:19} the dynamic range of some harmonics


Oops, speaking of impossible ... is it just me or does that seem like an impossibly-wide dynamic range compared to harmonics on a real instrument??? I understand it depends somewhat on spatial placement and the instrument has to be able to perform in a wide variety of spatial contexts ... but unless I'm way off, this still seems a bit excessive. I've never heard harmonics get that loud even when I was the one playing them. Or am I just playing the recording too loud? What dynamic (approximately) did you play the fiddle examples, for instance? On my system, the first example sounds like _*f*_, and the second example sounds like a strong *mf/f* at the beginning of the phrase, ending on a mild _*mf*_/strong *mp* at the end of the phrase. Does this sound accurate to your performance or am I way off?




servandus said:


> I'm afraid that I'm not familiar with traditional Celtic music to do a decent job here, but I think you can draw some conclussions listening to these examples. I hope so, at least. No vib. at all here. As you can hear, the detaché is nice and light


This is very helpful, thank you. You did a more than decent job for a quick example! Much appreciated. Your examples don't have the particular fiddle sound I had in mind, but they do remind me a bit of Jordi Savall's style on his "Celtic Viol" albums (with obvious timbral differences since you're not playing a virtual gamba). And the playing style you demonstrated will prove quite useful for baroque dance suites and 17th century violin sonatas, etc.




servandus said:


> By the way, I think I don't need more edge in the solo instruments. They can be as "aggressive" as I could possibly need.


Perhaps this will be part of the solution for those who wish more "bite" in the string sections, in concert with the standard tools like EQ, etc. When blended properly, using the solos as first chairs may help with the detail of the bite without destroying the feel of it being a section.




servandus said:


> (as *pmcrockett *says, the timbral shaping is something to spend some time with. I did not try real time control, but you can change the tone of the instrument in some incredible ways.


I never tried it in realtime either, will be fascinating to experiment. But I confess this is something I've never gotten great at when I tried it with SM Brass. I usually give up because so far I could only achieve one of two extremes: either changes so subtle no one would know anything changed, or changes so drastic they sound terrible. I know in my case it's user error, but as time goes on I hope both of you will please share more of your experience with the timbral controls when your free time allows; it may help me and any others who might be struggling to master this aspect of the SM instruments. 




servandus said:


> I hope you find this useful. After having fun with the library for a couple of days, I'm beginning to dig deeper in it.


 Very useful! Thanks again for sharing your experience. It simultaneously makes it easier _and_ harder to wait until I can explore the instruments myself.


----------



## Sam Reed

servandus said:


> The first note of the glissando is a g4, which is only available in the violin as a the first natural harmonic of the G string.



Oh wait ... I apologize servandus, but I may have confused myself again. I happened to sit down at the piano right after listening to your examples again, and to my ears it sounds like this might actually be an octave higher than you said? Please correct me if I'm wrong, but to me it sounds like (all of these are sounding pitches) --


} The Rózsa excerpt begins on the C three octaves above middle C.
} At 0:14, starting/ending pitch is an octave and fifth above middle C.
} 0:19 = Two octaves and a fifth above middle C.

... and so on. Are my ears deceiving me here?

p.s. It is very nice to notice that the very high B is a bit flat compared to a well-tempered piano  ... so the instrument programming must be choosing between natural and artificial harmonics (?), but hopefully in a future update the player will be given control over this.


----------



## servandus

- About pitch: we normally use the IPN system (a4=440Hz). Let me check it out again tomorrow, when I'm in the studio. You might be right, and I don't want to create more confussion 

- About seagulls: in academic contexts we always try to use the technical term, but in everyday talks we often call it "seagull gliss." instead of "natural harmonic gliss."... maybe because is just faster to say  Let's call it "firebird gliss." here: wet or burning, let's everything be about birds. I might be wrong, but even in English, don't you casually call it that way also? Maybe I'm just confused by videos like this (although, now that I think about it, he could be talking about a "seagull effect" (i.e. randomly playing "firebird" glissandi in a whole section) rather than a "seagull gliss")




- About the dynamic range: yes, they clearly sound "compressed" when compared to the natural dynamics, but I think it's nice to have it that way, because, as you can hear in the Rózsa excerpt, the lower dynamics sound absolutely realistic, and people using the library in other contexts could benefit for that extra dynamic range.

- About Celtic vs Savall: yes, definitely more my territory. If I get some time, I'd like to play something from Bach's sonatas/partitas with this library. I'll post it if it's worth sharing.

- About layering/"bite": you read my mind. It's the next thing I want to check out. Yesterday when I was making your non vib. examples, I tried many things, and "badly misused" the library (remember those detaché noises?). Layering a solo instrument on top of the section is surely the first obvious thing to do... but I also want to get kind of a "bow-noise-only-instrument", so that I can add just the "bite" when it's needed. Again, I'll post it if I find something useful.


----------



## servandus

OK, I'm not in the studio, so I don't have access to the library right now, but I'm listening to the file I uploaded yesterday, and *Sam is definitely right*: they're all sounding pitches, one octave higher than I wrote. The gliss. goes indeed from g5 to g7, so it's perfectly possible in the violin (no "fake" harmonics in the library, then), and I think I've just realized what happend. Let me explain.

When I read in the manual that both natural and artifical harmonics were available in the library, and then I saw that the first key available in the violin harmonic patch was g4 in the keyboard (the g a fifth above middle c), I immediately assumed this was the first harmonic also available in a real violin, i.e. the first natural harmonic of the G string. Well, that was my mistake, and the cause of my wrong conclussions. It's not the case: g4 in the keyboard triggers a harmonic sounding an octave higher (g5). I was so subconsciously sure that this g4 was the first natural harmonic, and so engrossed in my keyboard playing, that I did not realize that everything I was playing was actually sounding an octave higher. Later, when I played Rózsa's excerpt, just before closing the session I was working on, I unconciously adapted my playing to what I wanted to hear (I played by ear because I know that work very well), and placed the melody in its correct register without noticing the octave shift.

So, the cause of my confusion was actually how the harmonics are mapped into the keyboard. They're not mapped as sounding pitches, nor are they mapped as stopped pitches (artificial 4th harmonics like those in the Rózsa example sounds TWO octaves above), but right in the middle (as if every harmonic available in the library was the first natural harmonic of non-existent, chromatic strings). This is indeed utterly confusing, so I would either change the mapping, or at least make it clear in the manual.

Of course, this brings about another question: the first and second natural harmonics on the G string, and the first on the D string of the violin are missing in the library, and this could be the case for all the instruments in the library (as I said, I can't ckeck it out right now).

So, thank you so much for realizing this, Sam. I hope everything is now clear.


----------



## servandus

Vardaro said:


> Does the length of the controller absorb the attacks?



No, no, on the contrary. If you breath-control the strings like you would do with the brass, the attacks sound unrealistic not because they're dampened, but because the tonguing makes them so explosive, that no one could believe they're produced by a string instrument. I'll post an example, so that you can hear it.

Of course, this is not a fault of the library, but rather a misuse of it. I experiment with these crazy things because even these weird sounds could be useful in certain contexts. In this case, for example, I want to check out if I can produce very short notes with these explosive attacks, filter out everything but the high freqs. where the noise lives, and layer the result on top of a section to simulate the bite we hear in the close mics of other libraries. I didn't have time today, but it's on my list of things to try.


----------



## chocobitz825

servandus said:


> No, no, on the contrary. If you breath-control the strings like you would do with the brass, the attacks sound unrealistic not because they're dampened, but because the tonguing makes them so explosive, that no one could believe they're produced by a string instrument. I'll post an example, so that you can hear it.
> 
> Of course, this is not a fault of the library, but rather a misuse of it. I experiment with these crazy things because even these weird sounds could be useful in certain contexts. In this case, for example, I want to check out if I can produce very short notes with these explosive attacks, filter out everything but the high freqs. where the noise lives, and layer the result on top of a section to simulate the bite we hear in the close mics of other libraries. I didn't have time today, but it's on my list of things to try.



I would recommend that for string instruments, using something like Touché set to the breath controller midi cc make for slightly more natural movement.


----------



## Gene Cornelius

I'm posting here because I want to thank you for saying this in this manner. I've bought th eSM Strings because I LOVE the Brass, and figured they would do true justice to the strings, but for the life of me I cannot seem to make it sound or feel "right" to me. This is only day 3 though, so I'm trying to learn, listen, understand, etc. 



oboemaroni said:


> Think my main issue with the sound is around the mushy/soft attack, especially on the ensemble patches, the legato transitions don't sound connected but all have the same soft fade in, it reminds me of Stevie Wonder's CS80 string sound on Songs in the Key of Life more than any real strings I've ever heard, or as if everything has gone through a transient shaper... I find the tone is also quite synthetic although better on the solo strings.
> 
> I've said before here that I think the reason the SM Brass is so good is that both the modeling and sampling arms of the company were working together, everything I've heard them do separately has been much less organic sounding, including these strings unfortunately. I'll keep listening to demos but it's a pass for me.


----------



## Gene Cornelius

Responding to this here post becasue I think that is what happens also to the designers. I do not really know, know do I have any skills to show that I deserve to even post, but I played with the SM Strings, tried to make myself believe, and then went and ranted for a while on my wooden cello, and came back to the SM Strings, and no, I think the word I would use is "grit". ... it's just too smooth? I want a solo string patch to sound more like me on a good day, rather than me trying to sound like a modern interpretation of what a cello (or other strings, since I do not play them) sound like. With modern processing, the general acceptance level of what a good synth "anything" is seems to get blurred more and more ... kinda like the shallow dof thing in filmmaking. If it's blurry, it must be artistic? 

But ... agreed... Saxer rocks.



Bollen said:


> I disagree... Saxer is awesome in his ability, but the library sounds very synthy so far... And yes, I'm up for the challenge! The problem with us (MIDI people) is that we get so used to the artificial nature of all the software we use and we tend to forget what the real thing sounds like, hence why I try to go to live concerts at least a few times a month.


----------



## I like music

Gene Cornelius said:


> Responding to this here post becasue I think that is what happens also to the designers. I do not really know, know do I have any skills to show that I deserve to even post, but I played with the SM Strings, tried to make myself believe, and then went and ranted for a while on my wooden cello, and came back to the SM Strings, and no, I think the word I would use is "grit". ... it's just too smooth? I want a solo string patch to sound more like me on a good day, rather than me trying to sound like a modern interpretation of what a cello (or other strings, since I do not play them) sound like. With modern processing, the general acceptance level of what a good synth "anything" is seems to get blurred more and more ... kinda like the shallow dof thing in filmmaking. If it's blurry, it must be artistic?
> 
> But ... agreed... Saxer rocks.



Ah, do your issues manifest in both the solo and ensembles? Funnily enough, not heard any solo cello examples yet from forum users (violin and viola sounded good though, at least in the context of the type of music that was mocked up in those examples)


----------



## Gene Cornelius

Ah .... well, you see, I am much more interested in the solo instruments than the ensemble. Right now I'm mucking about with one of my favorite fairly recent pieces ... and if I can get anything respectable I'll post it. That was one of my main issues .. I hear it's a solo instrument library, and yes, I gravitate toward the cello, and judge it by that, since that's what I know ... first thing I miss is bow noise ... the control does nothing. THe vibrato is phasey. The portamento is strange. It's also lacking that gravelly edge that happens when the bow chuffs on the string just right when ascending to upper positions .. I don't know what that sound is called, but lacking it makes for a very sterile sound. It's not right, at least not yet. The sample based libraries have it in some velocities, but then it's always there, round robin or not, so that is why I had high hopes for this. I sense potential, but for now I'm having a hard time wondering why I'm spending time on this instead of practicing the real thing. The song I'm working on was written with Fluffy Audio's Trio Bros violin, and I LOVE that sound, but the nuance of the way those samples come across (especially the too much always vibrato) has me buying library after library .. nothing seems to work. And I can't play violin at all. So that's not even funny. Might be cheaper for me to hire a violinist. The SM Trumpet, Piccolo Trumpet, and Viola work pretty good for this part too, although the Viola sounds more like a clarinet the way I have it expressed ... using breath controller to impel natural vibrato seems to help, but the attacks are just not right. I will admit, I am not learned pro, and likely doing it wrong. 



I like music said:


> Ah, do your issues manifest in both the solo and ensembles? Funnily enough, not heard any solo cello examples yet from forum users (violin and viola sounded good though, at least in the context of the type of music that was mocked up in those examples)


----------



## VVEremita

From another thread about vibrato... Is this possible with Sample Modelling Strings?



micrologus said:


> This app for iPad is really incredible:




Exciting video. I am really interested in the "slide" after 0:34. If you want the pitch to fall or rise gradually, pitch bend is very limited. But this seems to be a fluent connection of different notes by a slide which can be performed / controlled freely without pitch bend... Infinitely variable, completely controllabe pitch. This would be great for more contemporary compositions.

To play strings as an actual fretless instrument.


----------



## mikeh-375

All this talk of harmonics - perhaps one day someone will sample the subharmonics and the ALF's...any Crumb aficionados out there?

ALF - Anomalous Low Frequency


----------



## Vardaro

Chug?
I play violin, more viola, and like to mess about on a cello.
The SM solo violin does not sound like a violin 3 inches from my left ear; neither does their cello vibrate my sternum! The samples seem scripted to sound as for a listener, near but not too close.

"Phasey" vibrato?
Real vibrato sets off a multitude of resonances, either side of the target note, in the extremely spikey frequency response of the instrument's body. LFO vibrato applied to a non-vib sample modulates the final output of a single "set" of resonances, and can thus sound "synthy", or "phasey". The "body" IRs of SM (or Chris Hein), which are basically like early reflections, are essential to mask or absorb this defect.

I find SM strings sound like a very good recording of well-played strings, rather than the real thing right under the player's ear.


----------



## PerryD

I said I was going to make a CSS / SM Violin Ensemble blend test video, playing in real time. Well, I have a chest cold, so I don't want to use my breath controller. I do have an X-Touch Compact that I use for CC control. I just set a fixed level of CC2 (60) and I set the SM Violin ensemble size to 60, using CC95. I love how nimble the SM strings are for playing with melody lines. I could impart a LOT more expression by using my BC to sculpt dynamics as I play...this was just a basic blend test. I do think the SM strings blend very well with CSS and Spitfire Chamber Strings. They are great fun to play.


----------



## Gene Cornelius

So basically my listening apparatus are wrong. I'm not only comparing it to "real life" as a player, but to other recordings, and other sample libraries. I've asked some of my closer friends for opinion, and they agree. It sounds "not right". Of course they are all recording musicians ... not virtual instrument players. Granted, I cannot play the SM instruments properly, but, unlike the SM Brass, they do not sound anything like any high quality recording I've ever heard out of the box. Or, even with tweaking, or loads of ER, more 'space than I want, etc. As opposed to Chris Hein, for instance, or Fluffy Audio's Trio Bros.

My opinions are often wrong.

So if LFO vibrato is mechanical and fake "flaw" why not script something that sounds natural? This is after all a sample MODEL. Right? Not that I know anything.

Honestly, I run into this a lot. If I can't fake myself into believing it sounds realistic, how can I expect to do so for others? Yes, the expression potential is high, but so is that of a pure synth. At least with a pure synth patch there is no giveaway that it's not real. I think people are conditioned to expect, and then accept. "This is a cello: ....." OK, that is supposed to be a cello, so my mind is going to accept that as "cello". 

There is a very obvious interplay of harmonics and distortions that occur in a real instrument's sound. These are similar between each, but unique to each instrument, and indeed, player, bow, rosin, choice of strings, room, etc. Without these almost random "flaws" a virtual instrument sounds merely synthy. It may well be that I have not yet found the magic dial that turns these sounds on. Even the bow noise, cranked all the way up, does nothing, no matter how hard I listen at it, or what velocity I play at.





Vardaro said:


> Chug?
> I play violin, more viola, and like to mess about on a cello.
> The SM solo violin does not sound like a violin 3 inches from my left ear; neither does their cello vibrate my sternum! The samples seem scripted to sound as for a listener, near but not too close.
> 
> "Phasey" vibrato?
> Real vibrato sets off a multitude of resonances, either side of the target note, in the extremely spikey frequency response of the instrument's body. LFO vibrato applied to a non-vib sample modulates the final output of a single "set" of resonances, and can thus sound "synthy", or "phasey". The "body" IRs of SM (or Chris Hein), which are basically like early reflections, are essential to mask or absorb this defect.
> 
> I find SM strings sound like a very good recording of well-played strings, rather than the real thing right under the player's ear.


----------



## Fa

Gene Cornelius said:


> Ah .... well, you see, I am much more interested in the solo instruments than the ensemble. Right now I'm mucking about with one of my favorite fairly recent pieces ... and if I can get anything respectable I'll post it. That was one of my main issues .. I hear it's a solo instrument library, and yes, I gravitate toward the cello, and judge it by that, since that's what I know ... first thing I miss is bow noise ... the control does nothing. THe vibrato is phasey. The portamento is strange. It's also lacking that gravelly edge that happens when the bow chuffs on the string just right when ascending to upper positions .. I don't know what that sound is called, but lacking it makes for a very sterile sound. It's not right, at least not yet. The sample based libraries have it in some velocities, but then it's always there, round robin or not, so that is why I had high hopes for this. I sense potential, but for now I'm having a hard time wondering why I'm spending time on this instead of practicing the real thing. The song I'm working on was written with Fluffy Audio's Trio Bros violin, and I LOVE that sound, but the nuance of the way those samples come across (especially the too much always vibrato) has me buying library after library .. nothing seems to work. And I can't play violin at all. So that's not even funny. Might be cheaper for me to hire a violinist. The SM Trumpet, Piccolo Trumpet, and Viola work pretty good for this part too, although the Viola sounds more like a clarinet the way I have it expressed ... using breath controller to impel natural vibrato seems to help, but the attacks are just not right. I will admit, I am not learned pro, and likely doing it wrong.



After anticipating with full respect that I'm very sorry for your disappointment, and your experience counts as any other one, on the other side I have to say that reading your report I have the feeling you are misusing (or perhaps not using) several controllers. The main power, but also the main complexity of this instrument is the need of controlling it like a real instrument, and taking care of the parameters can make the difference between a satisfactory and musical expression, or a frustrating fake and sterile sound.

SM Cello has, compared to SM Violin and Viola, in my (and others) opinion the less performing body IR, and it drives to some discrepancies in sound (e.g. some IR are better for low register, other for high). But after that, it has not the amount and type of fault you described in a properly working and properly played installation.

For instance it's impossible that your Bow Noise controller does "nothing": it can increase the noise up to a nasty blow, or decrease it to an almost unnaturally harmonic sound.

Vibrato is never "phasey" but can sound pretty bad and artificial if the right cc19 Vibrato rate is not engaged and possibly modulated as in a real cello.

For cross strings, attack, and slide/portamento control there is a lot of automatic and controllable variation offered to the user by the combination of Velocity, cc26, attack detuning etc.

I'm available to help you with some tips and tricks and hints, you may message me if you like to verify if any of my comment is real for you as well.


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr

Well, my overall consensus is (after many revisions and listening) to almost every example posted here that there are 2 sorts of thinking and assessments:

1. If you like to perform something what "intends" to sound like a violin with all that freedom and options then SM Strings is definitely on the great side here. It is definitely impressive and just does the job without you get a headdache tweaking with a quadrillions of micro articulation management.

2. If you aim for a "symphonic string sound" (bold and rich like from Mahler Symphonies) which then this will be not your land of dreams. It simply won´t do that. I am pretty sure it doesn´t anywhere near arrive anything like that.

Now I can imagine that using at least their solo instruments to goose and enrich an already good programmed string line with a bit of lets say _the chaos factor_ which I consider (just for myself of course) of beeing of an interest. But for that sublimal aspect I am not getting them as I could probably achieve something very similiar with my options what I have already available.

Then on the other side there are very virtuosic aspects of that library which is in most cases very difficult to create with conventional samples, if not impossible to get that kind of fluidity on the lines. I remember I mocked up two years ago a little night symphony from Mozart and that more chamber sized settting could highly benefit sounding good with such sm strings. (of course in the right hands)

Overall I think also (in favor to the sm company) all of their products always had a high learning curve. My first experiments last year using sm brass were just shit, whilst these days they are definitely better (Think of my try mocking up the vader march only with sm brass).

However I am still following that thread as servandus did show a good direction of how to use them imo.


----------



## Gene Cornelius

The level of quality in sound and expression I've heard from others here indicates to me that I am not doing it right. But several things I'm not understanding, for instance, if it is impossible to not have a nasty blow with the bow noise cranked, then why do I hear absolutely NO change when I crank it up to 127, and all the way down to 0? This, by itself, would really help. (EDIT: I do hear a difference with it cranked, only when I apply much more velocity to the onset of the note ... I have misunderstood "bow noise". So basically, I need MORE bow noise ... as in during the sustain. I want to hear the rosin, please. The sound is "too pure"?) 

I have adjusted the vibrato speed, trying to suit the song or passages. I vary the depth of the vibrato with my mod wheel .. have not yet set it up for my breath controller.

I found SM Brass to be easy and fun to play and believe. Even dry. I am finding SM Solo Strings to be opposite. I will continue my attempts.

Thank you.



Fa said:


> After anticipating with full respect that I'm very sorry for your disappointment, and your experience counts as any other one, on the other side I have to say that reading your report I have the feeling you are misusing (or perhaps not using) several controllers. The main power, but also the main complexity of this instrument is the need of controlling it like a real instrument, and taking care of the parameters can make the difference between a satisfactory and musical expression, or a frustrating fake and sterile sound.
> 
> SM Cello has, compared to SM Violin and Viola, in my (and others) opinion the less performing body IR, and it drives to some discrepancies in sound (e.g. some IR are better for low register, other for high). But after that, it has not the amount and type of fault you described in a properly working and properly played installation.
> 
> For instance it's impossible that your Bow Noise controller does "nothing": it can increase the noise up to a nasty blow, or decrease it to an almost unnaturally harmonic sound.
> 
> Vibrato is never "phasey" but can sound pretty bad and artificial if the right cc19 Vibrato rate is not engaged and possibly modulated as in a real cello.
> 
> For cross strings, attack, and slide/portamento control there is a lot of automatic and controllable variation offered to the user by the combination of Velocity, cc26, attack detuning etc.
> 
> I'm available to help you with some tips and tricks and hints, you may message me if you like to verify if any of my comment is real for you as well.


----------



## Fa

Gene Cornelius said:


> So basically, I need MORE bow noise ... as in during the sustain. I want to hear the rosin, please. The sound is "too pure"?)



I agree that in the MF (in PP and FF I think it's appropriate) the rosin is a bit on the soft/pure side, but had you explored the higher range of the cc11? It produces a pretty strong rosin sound, totally comparable or even better than my best sample libraries. When I want my sound more "rough" I just pump up a bit the cc11 and if requested, balancing the sound with lower volume.


----------



## Gene Cornelius

I had not. That does help the "roughness" although it doesn't quite help the bow noise (as I understand bow noise). When I play my real cellos softly, I often have MORE bow noise (likely because I'm a poor player?) but I hear this on professional recordings or real players as well. I just sat down and played a bit, and yes, I hear MUCH more bow noise ... can be extreme if I want it, or lessen it as well. But it is always there. Definitely more (in ratio) to the intensity at which I play, bow speed, pressure, position, etc. Also something about the attack I'm not able to articulate ... I strongly sense you are trying to help, and I am not resisting, but trying to figure out how I am going so wrong with my expectations of this.


Later tonight I promise to upload something to show what I'm doing and hearing no matter how embarrassing it is. 



Fa said:


> I agree that in the MF (in PP and FF I think it's appropriate) the rosin is a bit on the soft/pure side, but had you explored the higher range of the cc11? It produces a pretty strong rosin sound, totally comparable or even better than my best sample libraries. When I want my sound more "rough" I just pump up a bit the cc11 and if requested, balancing the sound with lower volume.


----------



## Vardaro

Well Gene, I have often made comments similar to yours, but about the Swam strings! I find the SM strings correspond to the sound I hope folks hear when listening to me 5 to 10 feet away. But better.. I even stuff my left ear with cotton-wool to hear myself as others hear me!


----------



## Gene Cornelius

Thanks for your comment. I lay awake last night wondering if out of all ironic silliness I should have tried the SWAM strings first! I do have the SWAM clarinet which I like very much. 

But I wish I could say the SM strings correspond to how I hope people hear me. I've spent a LOT of time recording me, and being disgusted at how I really sound ... can you imagine the SHAME of a real instrumentalist turning to virtual instruments? Yes, I know you can, hey? But lack of skill is not the only reason ... lack of editability, control, recording space, boutique mics, a patient producer/engineer that is not ourselves, etc... 

Thing is, tonally, my cellos recorded by me in my house sound better than I'm able to attain with SM Strings so far. So I'm not just comparing to the "as I hear myself play" thing.



Vardaro said:


> Well Gene, I have often made comments similar to yours, but about the Swam strings! I find the SM strings correspond to the sound I hope folks hear when listening to me 5 to 10 feet away. But cleaner.. I even stuff my left ear with cotton-wool to hear myself as others hear me!


----------



## servandus

Hi, Gene. As I said in previous posts, I do think the cello is the least convincing instrument in the collection, but the way you're describing its sound (especially in relation to the attack of the bowing and the bow noise) makes me doubt if I'm totally misunderstanding you, or you're doing something fundamentally wrong in the way you play the instrument.

Just out of curiousity, would you say that you need more "grit" in the sound of this example?


----------



## pmcrockett

Haven't really played much with the solo instruments yet, but I just took a look at the solo cello, and my initial thoughts for improving the out-of-the-box sound are:

Go to the timbral shaping page and put all 10 bars all the way up. The cello will sound much more resonant and full-bodied.

The overtones control (CC22 by default, on the Controllers 2 Sound Control page), which is distinct from the timbral shaping, can be briefly spiked at the starts of notes if you're looking for squawkier attacks. It's basically like overblowing on a wind instrument. Turning attack detuning up might also help.

Automating the timbral shaping with CCs seems like it lets you simulate, for example, imperfect bowing on fast or soft notes. You can get some really compelling textural shades that are impossible using only expression control by combining the timbral shaping with the overtones control. Sort of reminds me of some of the bow pressure effects you can get from the Audio Modeling strings.

Experiment with the various body IRs (CC100 on the Controllers 4 Instr & Portamento page) to find the one you like best. I think I prefer 1m, which is CC100 = 0.

My overall impression is that this is a fantastic splitting of the difference between Audio Modeling's solo strings and a traditional sample library. I don't feel as much like I'm playing a physical instrument as I do with the Audio Modeling stuff, but the sound the Samplemodeling solos produce is just so much easier to work with than what you get with the Audio Modeling solos. So it's sort of a compromise where you get almost the playability of the Audio Modeling strings and almost the tone of traditional samples. I think it all works extremely well, and this will probably be one of the first things I reach for when I need a cello.

Should be noted that I'm using a breath controller, a Leap Motion controller, and a custom vibrato script, so my results may not be typical. I'm not sure how this would play with just a keyboard and one or two mod wheels, but I think I'd be frustrated with it if I were trying to work that way.


----------



## Gene Cornelius

Hi, no, not in that example. I think that sounds fine. However, I do not play the instrument with that intensity, nor would that amount of "grit" or "edge" be appropriate in the lines I tend to play. 

It is very likely the fundamental mistake is mine ... I should have done more research (looking longer for an example of the strings played more like I play them, and also that it is obviously a mistake for me to think that I can open up the instrument and start playing and expect it to sound at all realistic (to my ears). I made that assumption based solely on the SM Brass. 

Just now back form outside work, during which I thought about it a bunch. I don't think I am really qualified to offer any "worthy" critique. Certainly not in a position to publicly make statements that could be taken as disparagement and cause loss or insult to the makers. 

So while I will still try to express my current work, uploading something by tonight, I will refrain from further public comment unless I have something nice to say. Thank you all for your patience and forbearance.



servandus said:


> Hi, Gene. As I said in previous posts, I do think the cello is the least convincing instrument in the collection, but the way you're describing its sound (especially in relation to the attack of the bowing and the bow noise) makes me doubt if I'm totally misunderstanding you, or you're doing something fundamentally wrong in the way you play the instrument.
> 
> Just out of curiousity, would you say that you need more "grit" in the sound of this example?


----------



## Gene Cornelius

Thank you ... I'll try those things.



pmcrockett said:


> Haven't really played much with the solo instruments yet, but I just took a look at the solo cello, and my initial thoughts for improving the out-of-the-box sound are:
> 
> Go to the timbral shaping page and put all 10 bars all the way up. The cello will sound much more resonant and full-bodied.
> 
> The overtones control (CC22 by default, on the Controllers 2 Sound Control page), which is distinct from the timbral shaping, can be briefly spiked at the starts of notes if you're looking for squawkier attacks. It's basically like overblowing on a wind instrument. Turning attack detuning up might also help.
> 
> Automating the timbral shaping with CCs seems like it lets you simulate, for example, imperfect bowing on fast or soft notes. You can get some really compelling textural shades that are impossible using only expression control by combining the timbral shaping with the overtones control. Sort of reminds me of some of the bow pressure effects you can get from the Audio Modeling strings.
> 
> Experiment with the various body IRs (CC100 on the Controllers 4 Instr & Portamento page) to find the one you like best. I think I prefer 1m, which is CC100 = 0.
> 
> My overall impression is that this is a fantastic splitting of the difference between Audio Modeling's solo strings and a traditional sample library. I don't feel as much like I'm playing a physical instrument as I do with the Audio Modeling stuff, but the sound the Samplemodeling solos produce is just so much easier to work with than what you get with the Audio Modeling solos. So it's sort of a compromise where you get almost the playability of the Audio Modeling strings and almost the tone of traditional samples. I think it all works extremely well, and this will probably be one of the first things I reach for when I need a cello.
> 
> Should be noted that I'm using a breath controller, a Leap Motion controller, and a custom vibrato script, so my results may not be typical. I'm not sure how this would play with just a keyboard and one or two mod wheels, but I think I'd be frustrated with it if I were trying to work that way.


----------



## pmcrockett

After some continued poking around with the violin ensemble, I've found a timbral shaping setting that I think I like:




This cuts the strident middle harmonics by default and divides the timbral automation into three groups. Group 1 (#1, #2, and #3) is CC91 by default. Group 2 (#4, #5, #6, and #7) is CC92 by default. Group 3 (#8, #9, and #10) is CC93 by default. (Check the manual to see how the engine assigns these groupings -- it's intuitive, but not immediately obvious.)

I've reassigned the third group to be on the same controller (CC92) as the second group. So I have CC91 controlling the gain on the low harmonics (#1-#3) and CC92 controlling the gain on the higher harmonics (#4-#10).

This lets me adjust the timbre along two axes as I play. (I'm using a Leap Motion controller for this, so I'm mapping CC91 to left/right and CC92 to up/down hand movements.) Increased low harmonics and decreased high harmonics gives me a dark, muffled sound. Increased high and increased low gives me an in-your-face sound that's loud and has a lot of bite. Decreased low and increased high gives me a thin, clear sound. Decreased low and decreased high gives me a weak, almost sordino kind of sound. Right in the middle gives me the default that I set up on the timbral shaping page.

I'll probably clamp the range of values coming from the Leap Motion, because the extremes are pretty extreme, but I'm quite happy with how this is coming together.


----------



## I like music

pmcrockett said:


> After some continued poking around with the violin ensemble, I've found a timbral shaping setting that I think I like:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This cuts the strident middle harmonics by default and divides the timbral automation into three groups. Group 1 (#1, #2, and #3) is CC91 by default. Group 2 (#4, #5, #6, and #7) is CC92 by default. Group 3 (#8, #9, and #10) is CC93 by default. (Check the manual to see how the engine assigns these groupings -- it's intuitive, but not immediately obvious.)
> 
> I've reassigned the third group to be on the same controller (CC92) as the second group. So I have CC91 controlling the gain on the low harmonics (#1-#3) and CC92 controlling the gain on the higher harmonics (#4-#10).
> 
> This lets me adjust the timbre along two axes as I play. (I'm using a Leap Motion controller for this, so I'm mapping CC91 to left/right and CC92 to up/down hand movements.) Increased low harmonics and decreased high harmonics gives me a dark, muffled sound. Increased high and increased low gives me an in-your-face sound that's loud and has a lot of bite. Decreased low and increased high gives me a thin, clear sound. Decreased low and decreased high gives me a weak, almost sordino kind of sound. Right in the middle gives me the default that I set up on the timbral shaping page.
> 
> I'll probably clamp the range of values coming from the Leap Motion, because the extremes are pretty extreme, but I'm quite happy with how this is coming together.



Nice. Reckon you'll be able to share any examples of how the sound is affected? Obviously always a cheeky ask to ask people to play something, export it, upload it etc but if it was something you were planning on doing, would love to hear it.


----------



## pmcrockett

I like music said:


> Nice. Reckon you'll be able to share any examples of how the sound is affected? Obviously always a cheeky ask to ask people to play something, export it, upload it etc but if it was something you were planning on doing, would love to hear it.


I'm hoping to pull together a proper test piece to put the library through its paces within the next couple days now that I'm starting to get a feel for how it works, but if I get time tonight, I'll throw together a quick example of how the timbral shaping sounds vs. the default.


----------



## I like music

pmcrockett said:


> I'm hoping to pull together a proper test piece to put the library through its paces within the next couple days now that I'm starting to get a feel for how it works, but if I get time tonight, I'll throw together a quick example of how the timbral shaping sounds vs. the default.



Amazing! Would love to hear the test piece!


----------



## Sam Reed

servandus said:


> [...] they clearly sound "compressed" when compared to the natural dynamics, but I think it's nice to have it that way [...] people using the library in other contexts could benefit for that extra dynamic range.



I agree completely, I just meant that I wish every developer offered a choice of two patches to load: one "unlimited" patch and one "as close to reality as possible, including idiomatic quirks and limitations" patch. (Sort of similar to how in the SM string ensembles, they offer the choice of the standard ensemble patches and the "ensemble dry" patches; neither is better than the other, both are useful; it's just convenient for the user to have the choice which to load.) But, like I said before, I do understand that I'm a weirdo in this regard  Most people using samples probably see (as one example) a virtual tuba which can play impossibly clean and rapid passages in its lowest octave as a feature, whereas to me it's a bug.




servandus said:


> I also want to get kind of a "bow-noise-only-instrument", so that I can add just the "bite" when it's needed.



That's a cool idea! I'm not sure I would have thought of that right away; thanks for mentioning it.


----------



## Sam Reed

servandus said:


> The gliss. goes indeed from g5 to g7, so it's perfectly possible in the violin (no "fake" harmonics in the library, then) [...] the first and second natural harmonics on the G string, and the first on the D string of the violin are missing in the library



Thank you for reporting back on this! It's good to know there aren't any impossible harmonics, but it's a bit disconcerting to learn that some of the lowest natural harmonics are missing. With any luck, this will be remedied in a future update. 




servandus said:


> So, the cause of my confusion was actually how the harmonics are mapped into the keyboard. They're not mapped as sounding pitches, nor are they mapped as stopped pitches



You know what would be really cool? A kontakt script (or a few scripts; I know very little how this stuff works) that triggers the appropriate harmonics when playing as one would on a real string instrument. I'm imagining something like this: 

1) When set to natural harmonics, press the key of the open string you want (this keypress will need to act like a latching KS) and then a white-key glissando on the keyboard would produce the "firebird" gliss on natural harmonics for that string. (Somehow the script would have to add a little "fuzz" in between each node so it doesn't sound like a perfectly clean arpeggio. It would also have a different range for each instrument, since more upper partials are usable on the instruments with longer strings.)

2) When set to artificial harmonics, play intervals for the appropriate "touch-#th" harmonics. For instance, playing a perfect fourth on the keyboard would produce a harmonic sounding two octaves above the lower note, and playing a perfect fifth would produce a harmonic sounding an octave + fifth above the lower note, and so on. (The script could even detune some of the partials, when true to real life.)

3) Not sure how a script could accomplish seagull harmonic glissandi? That may require some under-the-hood magic directly from Samplemodeling. 


I don't understand scripting at all and doubt I have the mental capacity to ever learn it. If I did, I would definitely make this and share it. Perhaps someday I'll have the spare cash to pay someone to build it.


----------



## Sam Reed

pmcrockett said:


> After some continued poking around with the violin ensemble, I've found a timbral shaping setting that I think I like:



Hi pmcrockett,

Thanks so much for sharing your insights. Please continue to share as you discover new things. It is very helpful! (The timbral shaping controls in SM instruments has always been the hardest part to learn, for me.)

Thanks again,
Sam


----------



## Sam Reed

I wanted to share another resource in case anyone else may find it helpful. These videos are classics and you've all probably seen them before, but at least for me, I found it enlightening to review them:










Endre Granat Part II


Endre Granat demonstrates bowing techniques. On the string legato and staccato and off the string.




www.timusic.net












Endre Granat Part III


Violinist and Concert Master Endre Granat discusses Sul Tasto, Sul Ponticello bowing and pizzicato technique.




www.timusic.net






I went back to these videos mainly as a refresher on playing techniques, as it's been quite some time since I actually touched a string instrument. But in watching them again, I was struck by a few things that might be helpful when learning all the controls on the SM strings, particularly the tone-shaping controls.

Granat demonstrates different kinds of bowings and how they affect tone production, in a somewhat dry context (not dry as in reverb, but in the sense that when he plays, he's not trying to be expressive, and the examples aren't melodic - just isolated notes and scales).

For me at least, when referencing a recorded performance it's too easy to get seduced by the music, and end up focusing quite a bit on that even when trying to focus elsewhere. For anyone who suffers the same affliction, the examples in these videos will be valuable precisely _because_ they are in isolation, sans expressivity. (Note: I doubt it would be useful to try to match this recording precisely -- at least on my system, it sounds a bit too mid-rangy and seems to suffer from some close-mic "presence effect." Other recordings will be better for precise side-by-side matching. But hearing the tonal differences he produces in _relation_ to each other, outside of the context of a musical line, I think could be very valuable when learning to shape the timbral controls, at least for people like me who aren't wizz-kids at it.)

When he demonstrates sul tasto, it occurs to me that with enough experimentation, this must already be effective and attainable using the built-in timbral controls. (Ponticello is probably a different story; that sound is so chaotic and ever-changing, we probably need Samplemodeling to work some magic for us in a future update.)

Another thing I realized from these videos that I'm surprised I didn't notice before: the sympathetic resonance of the open strings ringing out whenever the bow or the left hand doesn't attempt to damp them. Is there a way to do that with SM strings?

And of course, there's far more value in these vids than what I've mentioned here. If anyone reading this _hasn't_ already seen them, you're missing out!


(p.s. The two vids listed above are the instrument-specific ones. Part 1 in the series doesn't discuss the instrument, but has some delightful little anecdotes from Granat's career.)

(p.p.s. Has anyone out there purchased the Itzhak Perlman masterclass? It's on my wish list, but for the foreseeable future, "spare money" = 🦄)


----------



## Vardaro

It's a hommage to the depth of SM strings that folks seem far more demanding than usual! (Mind you, I only have Embertone, Chris Hein, Kirk Hunter, and Xsample.) In fact Xsample has more bells & whistles than most: ringing open strings, Bartok pizzcato, bowing behind the bridge....


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

I'm honored by your passionate and competent reactions. I learned much from this discussion. Any opinion expressed in this thread will be the subject of serious consideration for future updates. Thank you very much.


----------



## Don Cajon

I had a hard time deciding whether I should get this or not. Some of the Ensemble demos sound just unbelievably great while others put me off completely. However, the SM brass is my favorite of all libraries ever made on this planet. The AM woods and strings sound okeyish (great playability but often with an unnatural synthetic sound quality to it) and it was my hope that SM could surpass the achievements of AM in the sound quality domain.

After reading this thread, I decided to give it a try as the most convincing parts of the sound demos are the things that conventional string libraries struggle with (dynamics that feel human, runs, general playability). And I must say I'm super happy that I put my doubts aside. This thing is awesome. I just played it for some minutes and am blown away by the playability and expressiveness.

I also experienced some things that I didn't find convincing at all, but I'll use the next days to study the manual and get more insight into how this library works and how it's supposed to be played.

However, as @Giorgio Tommasini is watching this thread, I have some feedback already that I wish SM to consider for the next update. To this post attached are two files. "SM Pizzicato Bugs - MoreVariationsPlease" is a simplistic rendering of some pizzicato notes on a g and a c# played on the solo cello. It sounds like the instrument uses just a single pizzicato sample per note without any variations. It seems to me there are 3-4 dynamic layers in use, but within each dynamic layer a different velocity just leads to a different volume of the same sample. This makes the sound of multiple pizzicati in a row quite machine gun like to me. I think this would greatly benefit from adding variation samples!

Also attached is the "SM Pizzicato Bugs - StrangeSustains", again the solo cello playing pizzicato. This time I'm striking with an increasingly higher velocity each keystroke. What I hear is that the first g in the range of velocity 90, the c# starting with velocity 50 and the last g in the range of velocity 90 sound more like a bad piano than cello pizzicato. This seems to come from a kind of sustain layer fading in too strong - at least that is how it sounds to me. I guess this needs more subtle adjustment? Also irritating with the last g repetitions is how playing the lowest velocity the pizzicato is quite rich of high frequencies, around velocity 50 these high frequencies vanish suddenly and around velocity 90 the high frequencies are back.

Normally, SM instruments are extremely good at transitioning from one point to another (for instance ppp to fff or non-vibrato to vibrato). To me, the pizzicatos are not at the level I'd expect from them.

The slapped pizzicato of the solo cellos g in the file "SM Pizzicato Bugs - StrangeSustains" sounds like a g# instead of a g. I guess this is just a sample placed at the wrong key?

Anyway, I'm happy I got the library and am thrilled to explore more of it, tomorrow.


----------



## eli0s

Without a proper walkthrough video displaying and showcasing the library's functionality I find it very hard to justify the purchase. The examples so far aren't as ground breaking as I would have hoped for and the technical aspects that might set this library apart from the competition are obscure. 
Finaly, the gui of the library is way below the today's standard. I would have expected something more towards audiobro 's genesis and modern brass gui' s. IDEALLY, a clear and coherent interface with most of the functionality fully accessible from the main page and with player count, position and distance graphically displayed.
I hope that future development and a proper walkthrough will convince me to buy the library, I own all of the sm (audiomodeling nowadays) strings but I am not satisfied with their tone at all so, I had so many hopes from samplemodeling to pull this off.


----------



## Garry

eli0s said:


> Without a proper walkthrough video displaying and showcasing the library's functionality I find it very hard to justify the purchase. The examples so far aren't as ground breaking as I would have hoped for and the technical aspects that might set this library apart from the competition are obscure.
> Finaly, the gui of the library is way below the today's standard. I would have expected something more towards audiobro 's genesis and modern brass gui' s. IDEALLY, a clear and coherent interface with most of the functionality fully accessible from the main page and with player count, position and distance graphically displayed.
> I hope that future development and a proper walkthrough will convince me to buy the library, I own all of the sm (audiomodeling nowadays) strings but I am not satisfied with their tone at all so, I had so many hopes from samplemodeling to pull this off.


As another SM/AM owner of all their other products, I completely agree with this.

I don't think developers can expect to release libraries these days without a full exposition of it, particularly given what their competition make available. Compare this to Spitfire for example, typically comprising Paul's walkthrough, Oliver/Homay's 'in action', and Christian's contextual accompanies all of the major releases, in addition to 4-5 audio demos. Of course I acknowledge that Spitfire are a much bigger company with more resources and personnel, but what would it take for SM staff to produce a simple walkthrough of each instrument & patch, and show the DAW contents for one of the demos that were created for the library. I was extremely impressed by the audio demos they provided (though others apparently weren't), but this is not sufficient for me to buy a library, as this doesn't show me what the library is likely to be like in MY hands. If SM let their intro price period expire without uploading a detailed walkthrough video, I think they will lose a lot of potential customers. I hope they don't make that mistake, because I think they deserve for it to be a success, because from what I hear of it so far, it's a wonderful instrument. 

I also made this comment on pg 1 of this thread, and SM haven't responded to this point, so I hope the fact that others have expressed similar opinions, will prompt action from the developers. This is your opportunity to really showcase what you have achieved!


----------



## pmcrockett

Okay, here's an example of default vs. realtime timbral shaping. The default example is the violin ensemble the way it loads initially, except that it's been switched to breath controller mode. The MIDI data is the same for both examples. I performed it with the timbral shaping then removed the timbral CC data for the default example. It's mostly unedited except to fix wrong notes. The timbral shaping example has the high overtone control linked to the low overtone control instead of to the middle overtone control as I describe in my previous post on this. This linking also doesn't seem to work correctly in the engine -- if you set two timbral groups to the same CC, only one of them reads the CC data, so I ended up having to copy the low overtone data onto a separate CC for the high overtones.

There's still work to be done on this, for sure. There are sections in the timbral shaping example where it sounds too much like a filter being applied, and I think this is mostly because I'm pulling the middle overtones out too much and/or too abruptly. I think constraining the CC data to a smaller range will help combat this. But to me, the timbral shaping example sounds overall a lot more three-dimensional than the default example.


----------



## Don Cajon

eli0s said:


> Finaly, the gui of the library is way below the today's standard. I would have expected something more towards audiobro 's genesis and modern brass gui' s. IDEALLY, a clear and coherent interface with most of the functionality fully accessible from the main page and with player count, position and distance graphically displayed.



I don't know... I just need the GUI for setting up the instrument and the current one gets the job done. Once I'm done with that, the rest happens through controllers and MIDI editors. No need to constantly open up Kontakt.



eli0s said:


> Without a proper walkthrough video displaying and showcasing the library's functionality I find it very hard to justify the purchase.


Something like a video walkthrough would have been great, indeed.


----------



## VVEremita

From what I hear in most of the demos I actually think that the overall sound is quite beautiful. After all, all of this is virtual. Even a recorded live performance is not the real thing but virtual in some way. 

I want a convincing outcome. I think that, depending on the composition, a lively expressive performance could be more convincing for listeners than the perfect natural "tone" in a lot of occasions. 

I am looking forward to a full walkthrough and more demos to see if it fits my specific needs.


----------



## justthere

Your efforts towards plumbing the depths of these VI's are greatly appreciated.

Would you consider printing one of these with more of a dynamic vibrato thing happening?



pmcrockett said:


> Okay, here's an example of default vs. realtime timbral shaping. The default example is the violin ensemble the way it loads initially, except that it's been switched to breath controller mode. The MIDI data is the same for both examples. I performed it with the timbral shaping then removed the timbral CC data for the default example. It's mostly unedited except to fix wrong notes. The timbral shaping example has the high overtone control linked to the low overtone control instead of to the middle overtone control as I describe in my previous post on this. This linking also doesn't seem to work correctly in the engine -- if you set two timbral groups to the same CC, only one of them reads the CC data, so I ended up having to copy the low overtone data onto a separate CC for the high overtones.
> 
> There's still work to be done on this, for sure. There are sections in the timbral shaping example where it sounds too much like a filter being applied, and I think this is mostly because I'm pulling the middle overtones out too much and/or too abruptly. I think constraining the CC data to a smaller range will help combat this. But to me, the timbral shaping example sounds overall a lot more three-dimensional than the default example.


----------



## Gene Cornelius

OK, so I'm having some luck, but not there yet. Speaking only about the violin, it is fairly accurate to say I'm aiming for a sound/feel that is most similar to the violin in the Anne Dudley Poldark Theme. To say I'm botching that would be also accurate. 

Also, I've been composing with Maschine, mk3. I use the Maschine pads and also my S88 keyboard to write and fiddle about. What I NEED to do is to move my creation process back over to ProTools ... Maschine's MIDI implementation and editing is horrible, and while the setup is conducive to creative flow, it makes it next to impossible to fix things without breaking other things, including, but not limited to that fact that it's not saving some of my input for some reason. It is also why you will hear dropouts in the violin. (the rest of the flaws are just me being lame ... it's a work in progress, and I'm very slow).

So here are two iterations of the same song: One with Fluffy Audio's Trio Bros Violin, which is what I used when writing. The other version is of course the SM Violin, which for the life of me I cannot make it NOT sound like a clarinet. 

THe piano is NI Noire, and the cellos are Chris Hein.

I WISH WISH WISH that the makers of SM Strings had included several style presets - even as broad as "Classical" "Gypsy" "Contemporary" that were playable out of the box. I also wish for a way for us to share snapshots or presets ... is there? So far my attempts to save those always come back incomplete ... something is always missing, including, but not limited to, Timbral Shaping presets ... ???

Here is the SM Violin version: 

Here is the Fluffy Audio version:


----------



## pmcrockett

justthere said:


> Your efforts towards plumbing the depths of these VI's are greatly appreciated.
> 
> Would you consider printing one of these with more of a dynamic vibrato thing happening?


There's a bit of vibrato in the examples I posted, but I find the vibrato in general to be pretty subtle except at very high values. Not a very musical demonstration, but here's a note played with increasing vibrato with the built-in reverb off. The vibrato rate is set to 77, the intensity increases from 0 to 127 over the first five notes, then the sixth note adds expressive vibrato set to 74. Then the whole example repeats with the reverb turned on.


----------



## pmcrockett

Gene Cornelius said:


> OK, so I'm having some luck, but not there yet. Speaking only about the violin, it is fairly accurate to say I'm aiming for a sound/feel that is most similar to the violin in the Anne Dudley Poldark Theme. To say I'm botching that would be also accurate.
> 
> Also, I've been composing with Maschine, mk3. I use the Maschine pads and also my S88 keyboard to write and fiddle about. What I NEED to do is to move my creation process back over to ProTools ... Maschine's MIDI implementation and editing is horrible, and while the setup is conducive to creative flow, it makes it next to impossible to fix things without breaking other things, including, but not limited to that fact that it's not saving some of my input for some reason. It is also why you will hear dropouts in the violin. (the rest of the flaws are just me being lame ... it's a work in progress, and I'm very slow).
> 
> So here are two iterations of the same song: One with Fluffy Audio's Trio Bros Violin, which is what I used when writing. The other version is of course the SM Violin, which for the life of me I cannot make it NOT sound like a clarinet.
> 
> THe piano is NI Noire, and the cellos are Chris Hein.
> 
> I WISH WISH WISH that the makers of SM Strings had included several style presets - even as broad as "Classical" "Gypsy" "Contemporary" that were playable out of the box. I also wish for a way for us to share snapshots or presets ... is there? So far my attempts to save those always come back incomplete ... something is always missing, including, but not limited to, Timbral Shaping presets ... ???
> 
> Here is the SM Violin version:
> 
> Here is the Fluffy Audio version:



I think the main trouble is note attacks, which need to be spikier and more varied, particularly in sections like at 1:20. I'm not sure how exactly you have MIDI input set up, but if you're using the standard CC11 for expression and aren't using a CC11 controller that gives you a high degree of control over spiky attacks (e.g. a breath controller), you may need to play around with Vel. to Dynamics (Controllers 2 page), which lets you dial in key velocity to control attacks (higher means the key velocity has more influence). Attack Time (Controllers 1 page) sets the length of time that it takes for attack expression set by key velocity to go back to the CC11 value, which isn't explained too clearly in the manual (EDIT: It's explained in the Playing Techniques/Detached Notes section, not the controllers section). I think high attack time is probably better than low for most things, but I haven't played around with it much because I'm using a breath controller and have Vel. to Dynamics disabled.


----------



## Gene Cornelius

I think I'd agree with that ... my attacks are actually "missing". I am using TEControl Wind controller .. is there a significant difference between that and a breath controller?

I don't have Vel. to Dynamics disabled ... hmmm.

The "clarinety" sound I complain of is during sustains. No matter how I fiddle with (I know .. the pun, the pun!) the Timbral shaping, it is always there.



pmcrockett said:


> I think the main trouble is note attacks, which need to be spikier and more varied, particularly in sections like at 1:20. I'm not sure how exactly you have MIDI input set up, but if you're using the standard CC11 for expression and aren't using a CC11 controller that gives you a high degree of control over spiky attacks (e.g. a breath controller), you may need to play around with Vel. to Dynamics (Controllers 2 page), which lets you dial in key velocity to control attacks (higher means the key velocity has more influence). Attack Time (Controllers 1 page) sets the length of time that it takes for attack expression set by key velocity to go back to the CC11 value, which isn't explained too clearly in the manual. I think high attack time is probably better than low for most things, but I haven't played around with it much because I'm using a breath controller and have Vel. to Dynamics disabled.


----------



## pmcrockett

Gene Cornelius said:


> I think I'd agree with that ... my attacks are actually "missing". I am using TEControl Wind controller .. is there a significant difference between that and a breath controller?
> 
> I don't have Vel. to Dynamics disabled ... hmmm.
> 
> The "clarinety" sound I complain of is during sustains. No matter how I fiddle with (I know .. the pun, the pun!) the Timbral shaping, it is always there.


TEC controllers are actually what I'm referring to when I say breath controller. I'm using a TEC as well. So I'd definitely suggest trying it with Vel. to Dynamics turned down to 0. I have Breath Controller mode turned on (Breath controller page), which changes expression from CC11 to CC2 and more importantly auto-disables Vel. to Dynamics and changes it so that notes cut off completely when you're not breathing through the controller. It's a matter of taste, really, but I prefer it.

As far as playing technique goes, especially on the solo instruments I rearticulate with a tongued _tah_ on the controller for any note that should be a bow change. I only use a continuous air stream if the notes are on the same bow. Holding the sustain pedal also creates a velocity-based bow change on the next note, though I haven't used that much so I'm not sure how it compares to rearticulating with the controller.


----------



## jaketanner

pmcrockett said:


> Here's Saxer's example processed using an effects chain that's pretty similar to what I often use on other dry instruments. (Saxer, if you don't want me to post this, let me know and I'll take it down.)
> 
> I gotta say, I'm liking how this sounds.
> 
> For anyone wondering, the specific effects I'm using are (in order):
> Waves TransX Multi (transient shaping to emphasize attacks on upper frequencies)
> Type Writer X (stereo imager/reverb to slightly widen the stereo field and fuzz the sound up a bit)
> Flux Spat (early reflections from projecting the sound upward)
> EW Spaces 2 (reverb, Abravanel Violins-Celli FR TS 3.0s)
> Zynaptiq Intensity (harmonic exciter/compressor, sort of -- brings out the character of the sound a bit)
> Overloud Gem EQ550 (hardware modeled EQ)


I much prefer the raw sample..this sounds way too processed for my taste..


----------



## Gene Cornelius

Apologies ... I had my terms messed up. Yeah .. "Breathcontroller" is what I'm using. Can't seem to make it deliver the same attack unless my eyeballs are bulging. Vel to Dynamics is off. Not starts at the slightest breath, and stops when breath ends. 

Unfortunately, too, another detail I dislike has come up ... exactly the same as in the Brass, try to taper all the way to silence ... can't do it, huh? Note tail does not taper, but cuts off near CC11 1-7. The fix? fade it with Volume. Oops, that's a fail. How many instruments in real life can taper a note all the way to silence without dropping off? Yeah .. .most.

I still do not like the sound of these instruments. Here I am literally begging the makers to come up with some presets as starting points that actually sound/feel like real instruments. Having all the control is great, and desired, yes, but one should not have to build the whole sound! Again, I'm comparing not just to real instruments as heard live, or by the player personally, but mainly, based on recordings. Recordings of real instruments. That's what I want them to sound like.

Reminds me of the digital character modeling world. With few exceptions, digitally sculpted trees, water, animals, humans, etc. tend to look and move like .. well ... animated models. Even some of those films that used real actors as bases for the sculpts, there is always some giveaway that it isn't real (credit of course given for artistic or creative and skillful mockups ... it takes TREMENDOUS skill to pull off.) Is this not an apt comparison?

Yes, these instruments do sound almost real and the music made by the masters who make them sound almost real is awesome ... sheesh, I wish I were that good. But all too often it is more ensemble/symphonic sound, not naked solo. 








pmcrockett said:


> TEC controllers are actually what I'm referring to when I say breath controller. I'm using a TEC as well. So I'd definitely suggest trying it with Vel. to Dynamics turned down to 0. I have Breath Controller mode turned on (Breath controller page), which changes expression from CC11 to CC2 and more importantly auto-disables Vel. to Dynamics and changes it so that notes cut off completely when you're not breathing through the controller. It's a matter of taste, really, but I prefer it.
> 
> As far as playing technique goes, especially on the solo instruments I rearticulate with a tongued _tah_ on the controller for any note that should be a bow change. I only use a continuous air stream if the notes are on the same bow. Holding the sustain pedal also creates a velocity-based bow change on the next note, though I haven't used that much so I'm not sure how it compares to rearticulating with the controller.


----------



## I like music

pmcrockett said:


> Okay, here's an example of default vs. realtime timbral shaping. The default example is the violin ensemble the way it loads initially, except that it's been switched to breath controller mode. The MIDI data is the same for both examples. I performed it with the timbral shaping then removed the timbral CC data for the default example. It's mostly unedited except to fix wrong notes. The timbral shaping example has the high overtone control linked to the low overtone control instead of to the middle overtone control as I describe in my previous post on this. This linking also doesn't seem to work correctly in the engine -- if you set two timbral groups to the same CC, only one of them reads the CC data, so I ended up having to copy the low overtone data onto a separate CC for the high overtones.
> 
> There's still work to be done on this, for sure. There are sections in the timbral shaping example where it sounds too much like a filter being applied, and I think this is mostly because I'm pulling the middle overtones out too much and/or too abruptly. I think constraining the CC data to a smaller range will help combat this. But to me, the timbral shaping example sounds overall a lot more three-dimensional than the default example.



Thank you so much. I like the tone too! I'm curious as to how one might go about writing a divisi line where the divisi'ed strings interact (e.g. if two divisi lines were to "merge"). Would you recommend increasing the section size for the note where they _merged_? Or would it be sufficient to simply write a note with Divisi 1 and Divisi 2, without it sounding phasey? @Giorgio Tommasini - any tips perhaps on how to go about this and have it sound fluid?


----------



## Vardaro

Clarinety sustains?

This comes from un-modulated sustains which a violinist just cannot do!
Even without vibrato, our bowstroke, plus the intermingled non-static resonances of the violin body cannot rival the clarinet's sustains.
Two solutions: baked-in irregularities as in Chris Hein's non-vib samples,
or SM's "perfect" sustains plus CC28 (attack detuning) and CC33 (dynamic modulation of tone and pitch).

Through a closed door, I have even very briefly mistaken a sax for a student's violin: odd + even harmonics, unlike the clarinet's odd-only ones. The basic timbre is similar, as the AM viola shows...

But I should like a gentle randomisation of vibrato amount and rate.
And I agree about stylistic presets to seduce the most demanding ear before we get going..


----------



## Fa

Gene Cornelius said:


> OK, so I'm having some luck, but not there yet. Speaking only about the violin,...
> 
> I WISH WISH WISH that the makers of SM Strings had included several style presets - even as broad as "Classical" "Gypsy" "Contemporary" that were playable out of the box. I also wish for a way for us to share snapshots or presets ... is there? So far my attempts to save those always come back incomplete ... something is always missing, including, but not limited to, Timbral Shaping presets ... ???
> 
> Here is the SM Violin version:
> 
> Here is the Fluffy Audio version:




Hi Gene,
in addition to the mentioned points, I would also say that in the Fluffy version Vibrato enters earlier and more intense. The SM sequence is lacking the Vibrato at an extent that my feeling is it's not yet programmed in the same way. And you know how critical is a good vibrato for realism and expression... If you share the MIDI file, I can adjust it and send it back if you like.


----------



## Fa

I like music said:


> Thank you so much. I like the tone too! I'm curious as to how one might go about writing a divisi line where the divisi'ed strings interact (e.g. if two divisi lines were to "merge"). Would you recommend increasing the section size for the note where they _merged_? Or would it be sufficient to simply write a note with Divisi 1 and Divisi 2, without it sounding phasey? @Giorgio Tommasini - any tips perhaps on how to go about this and have it sound fluid?



After talking with Giorgio, I'm here to answer:
- without the need of creating 2 instances, if the divisi is a very simple and short phrase, or chords, you may manage it with KS poly and mono (c and c#) and with ensemble size (CC95) (of course the temporary "merge" unison should have the size back to larger as you say, but it's easy to program, being cc95 working in real time). But...
- for the best polyphonic rendering, 2 instances are the best solution. In this case there is no need of worry about the unisons, because the instrument is designed to allow temporary unisons without phase issues. Then the feeling of bigger size during the temporary "merge", will be automatic due to the note being played by 2 sections like in real life.
- an overall recommendation is always valid: avoid parallelism and sync as much as possible. Every time something is sounding not convincing enough, just split in 2 lines and insert subtle variations (e.g. in timing, velocity and controllers) and you will get it back really believable.


----------



## I like music

Fa said:


> After talking with Giorgio, I'm here to answer:
> - without the need of creating 2 instances, if the divisi is a very simple and short phrase, or chords, you may manage it with KS poly and mono (c and c#) and with ensemble size (CC95) (of course the temporary "merge" unison should have the size back to larger as you say, but it's easy to program, being cc95 working in real time). But...
> - for the best polyphonic rendering, 2 instances are the best solution. In this case there is no need of worry about the unisons, because the instrument is designed to allow temporary unisons without phase issues. Then the feeling of bigger size during the temporary "merge", will be automatic due to the note being played by 2 sections like in real life.
> - an overall recommendation is always valid: avoid parallelism and sync as much as possible. Every time something is sounding not convincing enough, just split in 2 lines and insert subtle variations (e.g. in timing, velocity and controllers) and you will get it back really believable.



Thank you so much! Makes total sense. I'm close to hitting the buy button...


----------



## Vardaro

I like music said:


> Thank you so much! Makes total sense. I'm close to hitting the buy button...


Now you will only hear the good things. Like me.


----------



## Gene Cornelius

Thanks you for getting back, and for your patience. I'm losing mine, as you can tell, and am not proud of it, but I'll try to keep going. I'll translate my work to a MIDI file that has all of the pertinent data (Maschine's export leaves stuff out), do the best I can with it, and then send it on. It will be a moment or two.

For what it's worth, I am NOT a fan of constant vibrato. That's one of the problems I have with FLuffy Audio's work. In fact, I like where I had the vibrato in the SM Violin version. I play the same part in a similar way on the cello. THe concept of vibrato as a constant is a modern misinterpretation, a cover-up, if you will. It's overused. It is another form of expression, and to use it, more or less, rate and depth adjusted not to only to tempo but to feel and dependent on each note's "intent" .... at least that's the way I look at it. So choosing to NOT have it (which if I can play a cello line with no vibrato or modulation so can a decent violinist, as I am certainly not even a decent cellist) should not be rewarded with a strident tone that sounds like a completely different instrument. 



Fa said:


> Hi Gene,
> in addition to the mentioned points, I would also say that in the Fluffy version Vibrato enters earlier and more intense. The SM sequence is lacking the Vibrato at an extent that my feeling is it's not yet programmed in the same way. And you know how critical is a good vibrato for realism and expression... If you share the MIDI file, I can adjust it and send it back if you like.


----------



## Vardaro

To my ears, a modern violin withot _any_ vibrato, (as oposed to a discreet, varied vibrato,) sounds pretty strident. When I play without, it's a vibrato with zero amplitude! In fact I am pleased to find that the vibrato offset can be zero, avoiding that vulgar vib-bulge effect on every note.


----------



## justthere

Hi Gene - 

It’s been said before here, but you are not left with a dull iron bar if you don’t use vibrato. Your line is still a ribbon that can move in the wind, to be poetic about it. Use dynamics. You seem to be in the habit (not judging you) of expecting the instrument to do things for you. One of the big differences between SM/AM and the others is that you really have to play it. It’s a real virtual instrument. It will do string-y things if you make it do so. No vibrato? Decrescendo! Sforzando! Make it talk. That’s why I like this kind of instrument. It not only lets a musician be a musician, it _requires_ it. 



Gene Cornelius said:


> So choosing to NOT have it (which if I can play a cello line with no vibrato or modulation so can a decent violinist, as I am certainly not even a decent cellist) should not be rewarded with a strident tone that sounds like a completely different instrument.


----------



## I like music

I'd absolutely _love_ for there to be a walkthrough, that gives detail around the different cc parameters in the instrument. I bought the strings, and will spend time messing about, but I think for existing customers (and prospective ones) some tips, tricks, dos and don'ts would be amazing.

Well, off to read the manual now so perhaps most of this will be answered in there, but I feel that a video walkthrough format goes down really well, especially with such a versatile instrument.


----------



## Gene Cornelius

Thanks justthere, I'll take that gentle admonishment in the spirit it was intended and redouble my efforts. It is very likely that I need to really look at how I set things up ... I feel like a monkey juggling in a space capsule ... it's not very natural feeling ... so if I can make it feel more like an instrument maybe it will allow me to make it sound like one. I like being able to edit, but I'd rather make most of the musical decisions while playing, not editing.

Thanks again.



justthere said:


> Hi Gene -
> 
> It’s been said before here, but you are not left with a dull iron bar if you don’t use vibrato. Your line is still a ribbon that can move in the wind, to be poetic about it. Use dynamics. You seem to be in the habit (not judging you) of expecting the instrument to do things for you. One of the big differences between SM/AM and the others is that you really have to play it. It’s a real virtual instrument. It will do string-y things if you make it do so. No vibrato? Decrescendo! Sforzando! Make it talk. That’s why I like this kind of instrument. It not only lets a musician be a musician, it _requires_ it.


----------



## justthere

Absolutely meant to be encouragement. 

How are you using the breath controller and its software? Is it a TEControl BC2? If so, I recommend breath pressure left at CC2, bite for mod (CC1), and to start with, nod set to control vibrato speed. You may find as I have that it’s very intuitive how when you keep your head level it’s a reasonable speed, and as you tilt your head up vibrato will accelerate.



Gene Cornelius said:


> Thanks justthere, I'll take that gentle admonishment in the spirit it was intended and redouble my efforts. It is very likely that I need to really look at how I set things up ... I feel like a monkey juggling in a space capsule ... it's not very natural feeling ... so if I can make it feel more like an instrument maybe it will allow me to make it sound like one. I like being able to edit, but I'd rather make most of the musical decisions while playing, not editing.
> 
> Thanks again.


----------



## justthere

pmcrockett said:


> There's a bit of vibrato in the examples I posted, but I find the vibrato in general to be pretty subtle except at very high values. Not a very musical demonstration, but here's a note played with increasing vibrato with the built-in reverb off. The vibrato rate is set to 77, the intensity increases from 0 to 127 over the first five notes, then the sixth note adds expressive vibrato set to 74. Then the whole example repeats with the reverb turned on.



Thank you for going to the trouble of posting this. 

What I’m unclear on is: is it so that the max intensity, or range of the vibrato, is a parameter you can set, or is it a fixed depth? In other words, can you define max depth as say a quarter-tone, and control the amount up to that max with a vibrato depth controller? Or is the max already set? And is “expressive vibrato” a different kind of vibrato?

Also, does it always do that pitch wobble thing on note offs with vibrato?

Thanks again.


----------



## pmcrockett

justthere said:


> Thank you for going to the trouble of posting this.
> 
> What I’m unclear on is: is it so that the max intensity, or range of the vibrato, is a parameter you can set, or is it a fixed depth? In other words, can you define max depth as say a quarter-tone, and control the amount up to that max with a vibrato depth controller? Or is the max already set? And is “expressive vibrato” a different kind of vibrato?
> 
> Also, does it always do that pitch wobble thing on note offs with vibrato?
> 
> Thanks again.


The max depth is controlled by the intensity parameter. The detuning and effect on timbre increase as you increase the value, but you can't set it to detune by a specific number of cents. This is more evident on the solo instruments where you can hear the specifics of the vibrato; the ensembles, of course, sound blurry as you would expect.

The expressive vibrato is a separate parameter (only present for the ensembles) that adds a degree of perceptible phase to the vibrato -- sort of like you get with solo instrument vibrato -- on top of the blurry randomness of normal ensemble vibrato.

It has that warble on note-off vibrato if you let go of the note and continue to sustain the expression CC. It sounds like the modeled vibrato continues to apply to whatever tail resonance occurs. I only notice this phenomenon on the ensembles. The solos seem unaffected. The length of this tail resonance is set by the release time parameter, but you can't turn it off entirely. If you set expression to 0 before you release the note, though, it will choke the tail and you won't hear the warble.


Gene Cornelius said:


> Thanks you for getting back, and for your patience. I'm losing mine, as you can tell, and am not proud of it, but I'll try to keep going. I'll translate my work to a MIDI file that has all of the pertinent data (Maschine's export leaves stuff out), do the best I can with it, and then send it on. It will be a moment or two.
> 
> For what it's worth, I am NOT a fan of constant vibrato. That's one of the problems I have with FLuffy Audio's work. In fact, I like where I had the vibrato in the SM Violin version. I play the same part in a similar way on the cello. THe concept of vibrato as a constant is a modern misinterpretation, a cover-up, if you will. It's overused. It is another form of expression, and to use it, more or less, rate and depth adjusted not to only to tempo but to feel and dependent on each note's "intent" .... at least that's the way I look at it. So choosing to NOT have it (which if I can play a cello line with no vibrato or modulation so can a decent violinist, as I am certainly not even a decent cellist) should not be rewarded with a strident tone that sounds like a completely different instrument.


I'm finding that on the solo instruments, cranking the Dyn Modulation (Controllers 3 page) way up helps on non-vib sustains. It adds some irregularity. It also seems to help to futz with the Overtones parameter (Controllers 2 page) during sustains, which helps suggest irregularities in how the bow is contacting the string.


----------



## TomaeusD

There's something about the ensemble strings that makes me want to write in a Middle Eastern style.


----------



## I like music

TomaeusD said:


> There's something about the ensemble strings that makes me want to write in a Middle Eastern style.



And makes me want to listen to it more ... !

If you do extend this, definitely put it up here 

The expression on these sounds really good to my ears, and so does the sound (though I'm on laptop speakers right now!).

How much tweaking of the different parameters did you do here? Curious to know how much of this is otb and what you applied to get the sound, as I would personally be very happy with that.


----------



## Saxer

I tried stacking SM strings here:





__





September Rain - Piano & Strings


The strings are Samplemodeling Strings stacked with Spitfire Chamber Strings (Performance Legatos).




vi-control.net


----------



## Fa

Gene Cornelius said:


> Thanks you for getting back, and for your patience. I'm losing mine, as you can tell, and am not proud of it, but I'll try to keep going. I'll translate my work to a MIDI file that has all of the pertinent data (Maschine's export leaves stuff out), do the best I can with it, and then send it on. It will be a moment or two.
> 
> For what it's worth, I am NOT a fan of constant vibrato. That's one of the problems I have with FLuffy Audio's work. In fact, I like where I had the vibrato in the SM Violin version. I play the same part in a similar way on the cello. THe concept of vibrato as a constant is a modern misinterpretation, a cover-up, if you will. It's overused. It is another form of expression, and to use it, more or less, rate and depth adjusted not to only to tempo but to feel and dependent on each note's "intent" .... at least that's the way I look at it. So choosing to NOT have it (which if I can play a cello line with no vibrato or modulation so can a decent violinist, as I am certainly not even a decent cellist) should not be rewarded with a strident tone that sounds like a completely different instrument.



Hi @Gene Cornelius , please accept my apologies: my fault I didn't understand your comments. It makes perfect sense to use vibrato just the way you like, and where you like, and that's what the SM Strings are designed for.
I was confused by some previous statements about your preference for fluffy vs. SM and I was just thinking that for a fair comparison you should use vibrato the same way, to compare apples with apples.

Sorry again for misunderstanding your statement.


----------



## LHall

Here's an extremely quick thing I did as a string quartet plus the bass. Literally one pass improvised on each part with almost no going back and editing except for adjust a note pitch here and there.


----------



## I like music

@Fa thanks for all your help to forum members so far. I have a very basic question (due to my general lack of knowledge around midi) but what is the relationship between cc25 and cc26, if any? Vel to Dynamics I think I understand (If velocity is 100 but dynamics are at 50, I'm assuming the attack will be harsher and then ramp down to 50, which will be effectively the sustain dynamic). But I'm not sure what note-on-duration means... and what a higher value does? Any help hugely appreciated!

EDIT

OK, figured out CC 26's affect so I know what that does. Again, silly question but what's the impact of Release Time here?

2nd EDIT

Figured it out. Speakers weren't loud enough to be able to tell the difference, before.

Haven't placed it in an orchestral mix yet, but just messing around with this, it sounds/feels amazing.


----------



## Fa

I like music said:


> @Fa thanks for all your help to forum members so far. I have a very basic question (due to my general lack of knowledge around midi) but what is the relationship between cc25 and cc26, if any? Vel to Dynamics I think I understand (If velocity is 100 but dynamics are at 50, I'm assuming the attack will be harsher and then ramp down to 50, which will be effectively the sustain dynamic). But I'm not sure what note-on-duration means... and what a higher value does? Any help hugely appreciated!
> 
> EDIT
> 
> OK, figured out CC 26's affect so I know what that does. Again, silly question but what's the impact of Release Time here?
> 
> 2nd EDIT
> 
> Figured it out. Speakers weren't loud enough to be able to tell the difference, before.
> 
> Haven't placed it in an orchestral mix yet, but just messing around with this, it sounds/feels amazing.



Yes, you understood the logic but there is something less evident, and important to know: cc26 is interacting with Velocity to control the length and evidence of the legato (and portamento speed), then if you want a slurred and slow legato you will use lower velocities and higher cc26, viceversa if you want sharp fingered legato, you will use high velocity and lower cc26. All the intermediate combinations will work just according your live play style, or your programming values (that's because the instrument despite providing advanced programming features, still is designed to be playable live, and so your velocity range on the master keyboard is very personal and can be adjusted with rescaling and cc26 relative values).


----------



## DSmolken

TomaeusD said:


> There's something about the ensemble strings that makes me want to write in a Middle Eastern style.


Nice. Flexible ensemble portamento isn't easy to model - having a whole section glide perfectly in sync sounds obviously artificial. There's a lot of arranger keyboard portamento in Middle Eastern pop, and this sounds like a big upgrade over that.


----------



## TomaeusD

I like music said:


> And makes me want to listen to it more ... !
> 
> If you do extend this, definitely put it up here
> 
> The expression on these sounds really good to my ears, and so does the sound (though I'm on laptop speakers right now!).
> 
> How much tweaking of the different parameters did you do here? Curious to know how much of this is otb and what you applied to get the sound, as I would personally be very happy with that.


Thanks! I'll admit I didn't spend too much time on it, it is very short so maybe I will flesh it out more and turn it into a song. All I did was record one midi track and duplicate for the other instruments, and rerecord cc2 for each instrument and shift the notes to their respective range while also adjusting timing for some a bit. The texture and expression of the strings are mostly from the breath controller/cc2, and I also layered on the solo violin with some moderate vibrato (I love the built in delay for vib amount, actually). Lastly I use a bit of Reelbus and Satin on the master for saturation and hiss (and w&f). It goes without saying that reverb and placement are important with these, too.



DSmolken said:


> Nice. Flexible ensemble portamento isn't easy to model - having a whole section glide perfectly in sync sounds obviously artificial. There's a lot of arranger keyboard portamento in Middle Eastern pop, and this sounds like a big upgrade over that.


Yeah, I love how silky they feel when playing! I do wish the portamento was easier to engage and did glide a bit longer, though.


----------



## Erik

Hi,

Interesting thread here with so many different views. After having struggled with the SWAM strings for years there is now something completely different on the market that surpasses the purely modeled strings in my opinion.

Like many others I wasn't very impressed by the official demo's (sorry Fabio), I didn't like the basic sound very much.

So I tried to change the color of the violin from Sample Modeling with a few plugin's, not because it sounded synthy to me, but moreover out of interest in the possibilities.
I was quite happy to be honest with the first results.
*BUT*, fiddling with the CC100 settings I found out that other instruments came very close to what I reached with the prior configuration, but simpler in one word.

So I thought I could be interesting for all to show both versions here. I used the Tchaikovsky midi demo, heavely adapted to my taste.

There is one is with customization by TraxV3 + Toneboosters Enhance (also a nice plugin for timbral changes), used here instrument4 (CC100=66, default).
The other one is without any customization, used here instrument1 (CC100=0).
Both version have reverb added (Fabfilter) though.

To offer you some more impressions I did the same with a small fragment from the first Violin Sonata of Brahms. Two versions as above,

I hope to have showed a different result from the official demo's. I think it is possible to let it sound according to taste. Maybe we're not here yet, also there are so many parameters to be handled. It was such a pleasure to work with this violin. At the moment working on some cello and bass tracks.

Anyway, I hope you'll enjoy this contribution. Let me know your opinions here, undoubtly someone of SM is reading here and very willing to improve their product.

So far, only after a week, my impression is very positive, of course there is a learning curve, I didn't touch timbral settings yet for example. I also did a small mockup with the ensemble strings of Sheltering Sky (Sakamoto), just marvellous sound and expression. But it needs more fine tuning. Maybe I'll post this later. I am glad this product solves and will solve many issues with the sample libraries that I had for years now. Good work you guys!


----------



## I like music

Erik said:


> Hi,
> 
> Interesting thread here with so many different views. After having struggled with the SWAM strings for years there is now something completely different on the market that surpasses the purely modeled strings in my opinion.
> 
> Like many others I wasn't very impressed by the official demo's (sorry Fabio), I didn't like the basic sound very much.
> 
> Having tried out in the past all possible plugin's on my HD to get the SWAM strings better sounding I ended up with a.o. a plugin form Flux: Trax v3. It offers transient transforming via a Spectral Envelope. Shortly, I got rid for 80% of its synthy, hollow sound, but after all, the musical result appeared to be not convincing at all, again.
> 
> With some experience with this setup, I applied it, with different settings, to the new strings from Sample Modeling. I was quite happy to be honest with the first results. BUT, fiddling with the CC100 settings I found out that other instruments came very close to what I reached with the prior configuration, but simpler in one word.
> 
> So I thought I could be interesting for all to show both versions here. I used the Tchaikovsky midi demo, heavely adapted to my taste.
> 
> There is one is with customization by TraxV3 + Toneboosters Enhance (also a nice plugin for timbral changes), used here* instrument4* (CC100=66, default).
> The other one is without any customization, used here *instrument1* (CC100=0).
> Both version have reverb added (Fabfilter) though.
> 
> To offer you some more impressions I did the same with a small fragment from the first Violin Sonata of Brahms. Two versions as above,
> 
> I hope to have showed a different result from the official demo's. I think it is possible to let it sound according to taste. Maybe we're not here yet, also there are so many parameters to be handled. It was such a pleasure to work with this violin. At the moment working on some cello and bass tracks.
> 
> Anyway, I hope you'll enjoy this contribution. Let me know your opinions here, undoubtly someone of SM is reading here and very willing to improve their product.



To me, this sounds fantastic. I'm just trying to blend the strings into my template. So far, I've just been messing with the violin, and I'm very impressed. Yours sounds a bit more expressive, so I'm going to go back and keep learning the instrument.

I did have a question, wondering if you or someone else could help. I often see real violinists slide (lets say a big leap) up from the first note to the second note, but it is a _partial_ slide up to the target note, and then another finger goes down on the target note. So it isn't quite a full glissando up from one note to the other, it is almost like they got half way to the target note, broke off the tone, and started another note. In fact I see it happening everywhere, and my teacher seems to imply it is quite idiomatic in solos. 

How can one best achieve this through SM strings? A pitchbend that takes you some way to the target note, and then start the new note? I'd LOVE to be able to do this, because it just sounds _right_ on a real instrument (not that I can play this technique yet in real life). Perhaps I can with the virtual instrument!


----------



## Vardaro

I like music said:


> So it isn't quite a full glissando up from one note to the other, it is almost like they got half way to the target note, broke off the tone, and started another note.


This is missing from _every_ string library as far as I know.
I call it the "classical" slide, as oppsed to the "gypsy" (or even "Heifetz"?) slide, which we should only use about twice a month!

Of course, the target note has to be on the beat...
Maybe a pitchbend at the end of the previous note? But the timbre should get a little "fluffier" as the finger slides without pressure (CC11?)
Or a ghost note halfway up?


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

I like music said:


> To me, this sounds fantastic. I'm just trying to blend the strings into my template. So far, I've just been messing with the violin, and I'm very impressed. Yours sounds a bit more expressive, so I'm going to go back and keep learning the instrument.
> 
> I did have a question, wondering if you or someone else could help. I often see real violinists slide (lets say a big leap) up from the first note to the second note, but it is a _partial_ slide up to the target note, and then another finger goes down on the target note. So it isn't quite a full glissando up from one note to the other, it is almost like they got half way to the target note, broke off the tone, and started another note. In fact I see it happening everywhere, and my teacher seems to imply it is quite idiomatic in solos.
> 
> How can one best achieve this through SM strings? A pitchbend that takes you some way to the target note, and then start the new note? I'd LOVE to be able to do this, because it just sounds _right_ on a real instrument (not that I can play this technique yet in real life). Perhaps I can with the virtual instrument!



I like music,

this is feasible and actually very easy. You just need to overlap the second note, and, before the pitch reaches the target, overlap the third note, and you're done. PB is not needed.


----------



## Vardaro

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> You just need to overlap the second note, and, before the pitch reaches the target, overlap the third note, and you're done. PB is not needed.


Brilliant!


----------



## I like music

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> I like music,
> 
> this is feasible and actually very easy. You just need to overlap the second note, and, before the pitch reaches the target, overlap the third note, and you're done. PB is not needed.



Ah, brilliant indeed! Tips like these (ones that you are intimately familiar with) would be most welcome in a vid series. As I said before, I've only really tried the solo violin, and not had the chance to test the rest _properly_, but what you've got here is a superb instrument, _at least_ from a playability perspective. Congratulations.

And in case people forget, these could very well have been considered two separate products (after all, most companies do sell solos differently to ensembles) so it is great to have both in one product/place.


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

I like music said:


> @Fa thanks for all your help to forum members so far. I have a very basic question (due to my general lack of knowledge around midi) but what is the relationship between cc25 and cc26, if any? Vel to Dynamics I think I understand (If velocity is 100 but dynamics are at 50, I'm assuming the attack will be harsher and then ramp down to 50, which will be effectively the sustain dynamic). But I'm not sure what note-on-duration means... and what a higher value does? Any help hugely appreciated!
> 
> EDIT
> 
> OK, figured out CC 26's affect so I know what that does. Again, silly question but what's the impact of Release Time here?
> 
> 2nd EDIT
> 
> Figured it out. Speakers weren't loud enough to be able to tell the difference, before.
> 
> Haven't placed it in an orchestral mix yet, but just messing around with this, it sounds/feels amazing.



I like music,

CC25, if set to 127, creates an expression (CC11) ramp between the note-on velocity and the current CC11. This means a crescendo effect if the note-on velocity is below CC11 and below 80, or a decrescendo (accent) if it's above CC11 and above 80. Playing velocity 80 will yield the original attack, without any CC11 ramp. The duration of the ramp is controlled by note-on velocity and by CC26. If the latter is set to high values, the ramp will be longer. 

Conversely one can get rid of these ramps, which are mainly conceived to mimic the acceleration of the bow, by setting CC25 to zero. This is not recommended, though, unless you're using a breath controller and want to sculp the ramp by progressively increasing the pressure. Intermediate values of CC25 can also be used, to get partial ramps.


----------



## I like music

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> I like music,
> 
> CC25, if set to 127, creates an expression (CC11) ramp between the note-on velocity and the current CC11. This means a crescendo effect if the note-on velocity is below CC11 and below 80, or a decrescendo (accent) if it's above CC11 and above 80. Playing velocity 80 will yield the original attack, without any CC11 ramp. The duration of the ramp is controlled by note-on velocity and by CC26. If the latter is set to high velues, the ramp will be longer.
> 
> Conversely one can get rid of these ramps, which are mainly conceived to mimic the acceleration of the bow, by setting CC25 to zero. This is not recommended, though, unless you're using a breath controller and want to sculp the ramp by progressively increasing the pressure. Intermediate values of CC25 can also be used, to get partial ramps.



Super, thank you!


----------



## Vardaro

I'm busy copy/pasting...


----------



## Daniel F.

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> I like music,
> 
> CC25, if set to 127, creates an expression (CC11) ramp between the note-on velocity and the current CC11. This means a crescendo effect if the note-on velocity is below CC11 and below 80, or a decrescendo (accent) if it's above CC11 and above 80. Playing velocity 80 will yield the original attack, without any CC11 ramp. The duration of the ramp is controlled by note-on velocity and by CC26. If the latter is set to high values, the ramp will be longer.
> 
> Conversely one can get rid of these ramps, which are mainly conceived to mimic the acceleration of the bow, by setting CC25 to zero. This is not recommended, though, unless you're using a breath controller and want to sculp the ramp by progressively increasing the pressure. Intermediate values of CC25 can also be used, to get partial ramps.



Is there any plan to add this in the French Horns? I belive this works in Trumpets and Trombones but not in the French Horns. It would be great to have something like this be the same between all the instruments so you can move midi from other tracks and have it play the same.


----------



## Fa

Erik said:


> Hi,
> 
> Interesting thread here with so many different views. After having struggled with the SWAM strings for years there is now something completely different on the market that surpasses the purely modeled strings in my opinion.
> 
> Like many others I wasn't very impressed by the official demo's (sorry Fabio), I didn't like the basic sound very much.
> 
> So I tried to change the color of the violin from Sample Modeling with a few plugin's, not because it sounded synthy to me, but moreover out of interest in the possibilities.
> I was quite happy to be honest with the first results.
> *BUT*, fiddling with the CC100 settings I found out that other instruments came very close to what I reached with the prior configuration, but simpler in one word.
> 
> So I thought I could be interesting for all to show both versions here. I used the Tchaikovsky midi demo, heavely adapted to my taste.
> 
> There is one is with customization by TraxV3 + Toneboosters Enhance (also a nice plugin for timbral changes), used here instrument4 (CC100=66, default).
> The other one is without any customization, used here instrument1 (CC100=0).
> Both version have reverb added (Fabfilter) though.
> 
> To offer you some more impressions I did the same with a small fragment from the first Violin Sonata of Brahms. Two versions as above,
> 
> I hope to have showed a different result from the official demo's. I think it is possible to let it sound according to taste. Maybe we're not here yet, also there are so many parameters to be handled. It was such a pleasure to work with this violin. At the moment working on some cello and bass tracks.
> 
> Anyway, I hope you'll enjoy this contribution. Let me know your opinions here, undoubtly someone of SM is reading here and very willing to improve their product.
> 
> So far, only after a week, my impression is very positive, of course there is a learning curve, I didn't touch timbral settings yet for example. I also did a small mockup with the ensemble strings of Sheltering Sky (Sakamoto), just marvellous sound and expression. But it needs more fine tuning. Maybe I'll post this later. I am glad this product solves and will solve many issues with the sample libraries that I had for years now. Good work you guys!



Hi Erik,
nice experiments!
As you discovered, the (cc100) Body IR is a key feature of all the SM products, and of course it is for Solo&Ensemble Strings. It is actually designed for the reason you explained, being the taste of a user or the requested colour of an arrangement different.

This second point is even more important in my opinion, because for instance in your Tchaikovsky I like the v4 more than the too dark v1, but in Brahms it's the opposite, I find the v4 too acid, and v1 more on spot.

To be very honest by the way I don't like the metallic resonance underlined by your effect chain: maybe it get masked when you merge the line into an orchestration, but listening to it stand alone give me a bad feeling of forced or slightly distorted sound. 

It happens to me as well when I try to force the instruments into external plugins for sound shaping, and that's the reason for the collection of IR provided by SM, because a different body IR often is a better way to change the sound, compared to external plug-in chain.


----------



## I like music

This is one of the _best_ library purchases I've ever made!!! I can't believe it. Again, caveating this with the fact that I haven't actually written anything with them, because I've just spent hours fucking around on the keyboard. So much god damn fun, and the sound is to my liking. 

@Fa or @Giorgio Tommasini - I'm looking at the CC which changes the body IR because I'm trying to get a sordino effect. However, the GUI doesn't let me see the full text for a few of the IRs. I can see that one is called "sordino m..." and another "sordino s..." but can't see what the full word is. Would you be able to help please?


----------



## pmcrockett

I like music said:


> This is one of the _best_ library purchases I've ever made!!! I can't believe it. Again, caveating this with the fact that I haven't actually written anything with them, because I've just spent hours fucking around on the keyboard. So much god damn fun, and the sound is to my liking.
> 
> @Fa or @Giorgio Tommasini - I'm looking at the CC which changes the body IR because I'm trying to get a sordino effect. However, the GUI doesn't let me see the full text for a few of the IRs. I can see that one is called "sordino m..." and another "sordino s..." but can't see what the full word is. Would you be able to help please?


On the body IRs, s is stereo and m is mono.


----------



## I like music

pmcrockett said:


> On the body IRs, s is stereo and m is mono.



Ah, thank you!


----------



## Fa

I like music said:


> Ah, thank you!



as you can imagine, the stereo IR has more depth, so usually has a more natural "position in the space". But the mono IR is less prone to artifacts, then when a more punctual and clean position in the effect chain is requested, mono IR can help.

The rest is definitely just a matter of personal taste and environment.


----------



## José Herring

Saxer said:


> I had the opportunity for beta testing. Here's a dryer example. Fun stuff: short and long notes without any key switches and just two controllers (dynamic and vibrato intensity).



Glad you posted this. After hearing the demos on the site I nearly gave up on this. But there's some real usuable stuff in your demo.


----------



## I like music

Fa said:


> as you can imagine, the stereo IR has more depth, so usually has a more natural "position in the space". But the mono IR is less prone to artifacts, then when a more punctual and clean position in the effect chain is requested, mono IR can help.
> 
> The rest is definitely just a matter of personal taste and environment.



I guess I'll have to trail-and-error, and see how it compares! I don't think I've ever before had a library in mono, so I've never even given it a consideration, what it really means, or how it sounds/implications. Better get reading on the subject.


----------



## Fa

I like music said:


> I guess I'll have to trail-and-error, and see how it compares! I don't think I've ever before had a library in mono, so I've never even given it a consideration, what it really means, or how it sounds/implications. Better get reading on the subject.



Fair comment, being not a trivial topic. Anyway several libraries or the player software it-self have mono capabilities, because the stereo imaging of the stereo samples not necessarily matches the stereo processing of the effects (e.g. spatialization effects with ER, virtual stages, ambisonic reverb etc.). So when the mismatch is too invasive, it can often be fixed playing the sample in mono, and delegating the stereo imaging to the effect chain.

Please note that the same is for the SM Strings internal effect chain: using a mono IR still produce a stereo image due to the Virtual Stage ER activity. In case you look for a real mono signal you may turn ER to zero and/or use "mono" routing of Kontakt.


----------



## Fa

josejherring said:


> Glad you posted this. After hearing the demos on the site I nearly gave up on this. But there's some real usuable stuff in your demo.



I still get confused by this type of comments. Saxer wrote several of the site demos, exploiting articulations and sophisticated phrasing pretty difficult or impossible to make with other libraries... and still people prefer his rough 2 controllers easy track... 

Not sure if it's a matter of naked rough sound or just music style, but still I can't refrain from finding it a bit weird. LOL anyway it's a very important information for the Forum readers, because once again it shows that "there's some real usuable stuff" in the library  

Due to outstanding flexibility, almost everybody can find something useful for his own style and taste.


----------



## I like music

Fa said:


> I still get confused by this type of comments. Saxer wrote several of the site demos, exploiting articulations and sophisticated phrasing pretty difficult or impossible to make with other libraries... and still people prefer his rough 2 controllers easy track...
> 
> Not sure if it's a matter of naked rough sound or just music style, but still I can't refrain from finding it a bit weird. LOL anyway it's a very important information for the Forum readers, because once again it shows that "there's some real usuable stuff" in the library
> 
> Due to outstanding flexibility, almost everybody can find something useful for his own style and taste.



Regarding the tone. I checked my violins from SM against the CSS violins, and I didn't hear a HUGE difference. OK, I was literally in a 6x6 cubicle, and the sound was coming through some cheap speakers and not through any monitors, but hey, if that's how people would hear both libraries as an end product, I doubt they could tell the difference. All in all, the one thing I had "resigned" myself to before buying this was that the agility would be there, but I'd have to sacrifice on tone. *However,* I'm pleasantly surprised at the tone. Can't tell you how happy I am that I bought this.


----------



## Vardaro

I'm a little confused by
- Early Reflections in the Virtual Soundstsage page of the manual (CC29), and
- Early Reflections on the follwing page which actally refers to Instrument Body IRs (CC100)

And what is the relation between body IRs and the sampled body of the instrument itself? A body within another body? (BTW in Chris Hein's strings, there are only body IRs, expressed in decimals of a second, and no reverb ERs as such.)

I do like the result: this is just idle curiosity..


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

Vardaro said:


> I'm a little confused by
> - Early Reflections in the Virtual Soundstsage page of the manual (CC29), and
> - Early Reflections on the follwing page which actally refers to Instrument Body IRs (CC100)
> 
> And what is the relation between body IRs and the sampled body of the instrument itself? A body within another body? (BTW in Chris Hein's strings, there are only body IRs, expressed in decimals of a second, and no reverb ERs as such.)
> 
> I do like the result: this is just idle curiosity..



Vardaro,

The Early Reflections are described on page 17 of the manual. The Early Reflections mentioned on page 18 (see screenshot) refer to an item of the drop down menu which should allow the user to select a different ER IR. We currently provide just one ER IR per instrument. This item is therefore reserved for future use.

The Body IR corresponds to the "fingerprints" of the instrument, i.e. the response of the body of the instrument when excited by an ideal impulse of the Dirac type. Not very clear, eh?  One could think of it as the sound obtained by hitting the ponticello with a sharp object.


----------



## José Herring

Fa said:


> I still get confused by this type of comments. Saxer wrote several of the site demos, exploiting articulations and sophisticated phrasing pretty difficult or impossible to make with other libraries... and still people prefer his rough 2 controllers easy track...
> 
> Not sure if it's a matter of naked rough sound or just music style, but still I can't refrain from finding it a bit weird. LOL anyway it's a very important information for the Forum readers, because once again it shows that "there's some real usuable stuff" in the library
> 
> Due to outstanding flexibility, almost everybody can find something useful for his own style and taste.


The demos I heard were on the video.. They referenced well know classical pieces. No offense to anybody but they fall way short of being convincing. When you reference well known pieces the ear inevitably compares it to the real thing. Saxers original demo shed new light on the library.

I didn't look deep enough to see if there were any other demos


----------



## AndyP

I have not been involved with samplemodelling, but what i partly read makes me curious.
I don't like working with keyswitches so much, I like it when I can play an instrument that dynamically aligns itself to my playing style. Is that what makes samplemodelling so attractive? I don't have much to complain about in terms of sound.
I'm looking for a solo string library that is "well playable", and I wonder if samplemodelling is a technical advance compared to classical samplelibrabrys.


----------



## Fa

josejherring said:


> The demos I heard were on the video.. They referenced well know classical pieces. No offense to anybody but they fall way short of being convincing. When you reference well known pieces the ear inevitably compares it to the real thing. Saxers original demo shed new light on the library.
> 
> I didn't look deep enough to see if there were any other demos



Thank you for the explanation. Actually I did the video, and so I apologize for not matching your expectations.
I totally agre about the challenge of reproducing well known music, and as we discussed before in this same thread, that was the reason for posting them: honesty. (way more easy to make fantasy music impossible to compare).

Of course I would be curious to listen to other products sounding better on the same sequences.


----------



## Fa

AndyP said:


> I have not been involved with samplemodelling, but what i partly read makes me curious.
> I don't like working with keyswitches so much, I like it when I can play an instrument that dynamically aligns itself to my playing style. Is that what makes samplemodelling so attractive? I don't have much to complain about in terms of sound.
> I'm looking for a solo string library that is "well playable", and I wonder if samplemodelling is a technical advance compared to classical samplelibrabrys.



All the people owning the library can give you feedback: in my opinion this solo library is today the best combination on the market of sound and playability. But after testing it so long during development I'm not impartial... other customers can tell in more neutral way.


----------



## I like music

Fa said:


> All the people owning the library can give you feedback: in my opinion this solo library is today the best combination on the market of sound and playability. But after testing it so long during development I'm not impartial... other customers can tell in more neutral way.



From what I've experienced so far, it is great. @AndyP I'm currently using SM strings to mock up Schindler's List. Now the reason I'm worried is because a) I have _absolutely no_ mixing/engineering skills, b) I'm new to the library, and c) you're used to bloody Itzhak Perlman playing Schindler's List!!! So by comparing my skills to a a violinist who is an absolute master in a field, of course my efforts will not look great. I'll post it up in a few days.

That said, I can't think of another library that you could use to mock this whole piece up as _easily_. Given that I'm slow at writing it all up in my DAW, and the fact that I have a day job, it may be a few days before I can post it, but it'll give you another reference point for how the library performs.

After that's done, I'm mocking up Star Trek First Contact, so you'll hopefully also get to hear the ensemble strings in action.

PS on the condition that y'all help me with my mix/balance


----------



## AndyP

I like music said:


> Schindler's List.
> 
> After that's done, I'm mocking up Star Trek First Contact, so you'll hopefully also get to hear the ensemble strings in action.


To the first point, Schindlers List, ... this is an ambitious project!

Second ... I love the soundtrack of First Contact!

Unbalanced is ok! Sometimes I think it's also good if not everything has been pulled smoothly to hear how it sounds real.


----------



## I like music

AndyP said:


> To the first point, Schindlers List, ... this is an ambitious project!
> 
> Second ... I love the soundtrack of First Contact!
> 
> Unbalanced is ok! Sometimes I think it's also good if not everything has been pulled smoothly to hear how it sounds real.



Very true. Hey, the biggest problem with Schindler's list is the fact that because I _wrote_ it all in by mouse, I now have try to emulate a _proper_ violin performance (the way he speeds up and slows down musically) by tweaking the tempo track. It. is. hell. But for those of you who can play it in, you'd be able to play Schindler's list in however you'd want (perhaps without worry about tempo?) within minutes with this library. But you know, I gotta write in all the backing etc so for that reason it is taking a while (yes, I still have to count up the lines in a score saying "Every Good Boy Deserves Football")


----------



## Vardaro

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> The Body IR corresponds to the "fingerprints" of the instrument, i.e. the response of the body of the instrument when excited by an ideal impulse of the Dirac type.


I understand.
But then what is CC100 doing? (1m,2s, sordino etc.)
And is the "body IR" added to/mixed with the sampled instrument?


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

Vardaro said:


> I understand.
> But then what is CC100 doing? (1m,2s, sordino etc.)
> And is the "body IR" added to/mixed with the sampled instrument?


CC100 is simply switching between different Body Impulse Responses, acting on deconvolved samples, yielding a slightly different timbre to the instrument. Please note that this switching does not occur while the instrument is playing, because of the risk of unwanted glitches. The switch will take place only when polyphony is zero, and this may require up to two-three seconds from the last played note.


----------



## I like music

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> CC100 is simply switching between different Body Impulse Responses, acting on deconvolved samples, yielding a slightly different timbre to the instrument. Please note that this switching does not occur while the instrument is playing, because of the risk of unwanted glitches. The switch will take place only when polyphony is zero, and this may require up to two-three seconds from the last played note.



So in this case we need to be mindful of switching back and forth between sordino, right? I suppose that's fairly realistic in the sense that in real orchestration it may take a couple of seconds for an actual section to put the mute on/off? I'm not actually sure. Just curious.


----------



## Fa

Vardaro said:


> I understand.
> But then what is CC100 doing? (1m,2s, sordino etc.)
> And is the "body IR" added to/mixed with the sampled instrument?



Maybe the point that was not clear is that the SM samples before being processed by the selected convolution body IR, don't sound like the original recorded sample: they are just a "component of the sound" deconvoluted with a SM proprietary technology. Then the cc100 can select different body IR, to convolve the primitive sound (you may imagine it similar to the sound of the string before resonating into the instrument body) with different virtual bodies, providing as a result different virtual instruments.


----------



## Fa

I like music said:


> So in this case we need to be mindful of switching back and forth between sordino, right? I suppose that's fairly realistic in the sense that in real orchestration it may take a couple of seconds for an actual section to put the mute on/off? I'm not actually sure. Just curious.


correct. The script doesn't allow to change IR until the sound is totally stopped (note off and release end).


----------



## Vardaro

Fa said:


> Maybe the point that was not clear is that the SM samples before being processed by the selected convolution body IR, don't sound like the original recorded sample: they are just a "component of the sound" deconvoluted with a SM proprietary technology.


Clever! 
In fact a solid body violin with four stereo moving-magnet pickups would work too?


----------



## Fa

Vardaro said:


> Clever!
> In fact a solid body violin with four stereo moving-magnet pickups would work too?


Fair question... I'm not an expert in electric violins, but I think that it's very hard to start from totally artificial material like a pickup sound to re-build an acoustic violin sound. The problem is the amount of interaction between bow/strings system and the body, translated by the bridge. For instance the SM technology works because it's "subtracting" a part from a real sound, and then is reassembling 2 pieces of a real sound, getting as a result something very close to real. If one of the component was artificial or insulated, I'm not sure if the result would be equally convincing: e.g. that's more or less what the physical modeling does, and the result, even if fascinating for expression, is not yet as realistic as the sampled or the SM sound.


----------



## Vardaro

I agree that we would not get the feedback from the vibrating body back to the string. But the output of the motions of the pickups would exite the "body" IR.
Is it not similar to convolution reverbs?


----------



## José Herring

Fa,

No disrespect intend for your work and effort. I get it. It isn't easy to do mockups of well know pieces.

My first and only comment should be taken as is. Which is I had planned to move on then Saxer posted a demo that I could actually judge. I'm not intending to mock up well known classical pices with samples. I am now interested because I have heard things that may come in useful for compositions intended for virtual orchestra.


----------



## Gene Cornelius

I just finished listening to Gjallarhorn: Grimborg. Any chance those (strings: cello/fiddle) sounds can be emulated with SM Strings? It's that immediacy, that "grit" that I'm after. So hard to define what it is that makes it so hard for me to accept the fact that I spent my money on something so dear, but not getting what others are hearing about it that makes it worth it. The SM strings seem to work ONLY in the distance, swamped in reverb and buried under other instruments. Naked, they lack something, and frankly I'd rather buy multiple sample libraries and live with the limitations of each, than to have infinite frustration. 

Likely my own expectations, I get that. 

As a direct result of not only my dissatisfaction with the SM Strings, but also in an attempt to reconnect with my acoustic/real side of things, I am playing my cellos even more, and almost come to the conclusion that it might actually take less effort to play real instruments. I simply cannot seem to articulate what it is that I am not being satisfied with. 

One of these days Kontakt instrument licenses will be able to be revoked, as it's frustrating that virtual instruments are one of the very rare products that you must buy with absolute faith that it's worth it .. no refunds possible. 

On the flip side of that, I guess I can hold out hope that maybe the next iteration of these strings (a free upgrade?) will hold a lot of serious improvements. If I could articulate my responses better maybe I'd be able to help with those improvements. But right now I need to stop wasting my time fighting with them and get on with actually working. I won't be using these strings though. Damn.


----------



## Vardaro

Gene Cornelius said:


> Naked, they lack something


The player, perhaps?
It will take as much tweeking to imitate Gjallarhorn: Grimborg as it does to do a refined classical mockup. This not an "out of the box" library without a lot of practice.

One point, though. My Korg microKEY cannot produce the highest velocities, unlike the virtual keyboard in Kontakt. Careful velocity mapping, perhaps?
Other point. It will take a lot of practice to play simutaneously on the pitch-bend and mod-wheel to get those scoops & crunches.


----------



## Fa

josejherring said:


> Fa,
> 
> No disrespect intend for your work and effort. I get it. It isn't easy to do mockups of well know pieces.
> 
> My first and only comment should be taken as is. Which is I had planned to move on then Saxer posted a demo that I could actually judge. I'm not intending to mock up well known classical pices with samples. I am now interested because I have heard things that may come in useful for compositions intended for virtual orchestra.



Thank you again for your clear statement. I had no intention of being disrespectful of your opinion and sentences as well.

I take your comments, and I give to them importance and a pretty valuable meaning: what I was pointing out is that despite the fact the library can produce pretty sophisticated phrasing, exposed by several demos (and I didn't refer to mine, being not impartial, and being the style and scope so different) we had lot of preference for a demo that was made using just a minimal fraction of the library power.

This is meaning (as I wrote) that something in the sound or the musical style was emerging and catchy, and apparently it's more important for some users than the other features.

I consider it an important evidence of the value of the library, and an interesting marketing observation as well.


----------



## Gene Cornelius

Yes, of course ... the real player ... and as in my case, the lack of the artistry that elevates beyond the limitations of the tools or instrument. I know this intimately. 

One other thing that has me wondering is that I don't hear a lot of difference in the IR. Confused by that.

Seems I'm getting full dynamics from my NI S88. (although it's actually quite a lot of fun to play on Maschine's pads -- mostly with the highest violin range)



Vardaro said:


> The player, perhaps?
> It will take as much tweeking to imitate Gjallarhorn: Grimborg as it does to do a refined classical mockup. This not an "out of the box" library without a lot of practice.
> 
> One point, though. My Korg microKEY cannot produce the highest velocities, unlike the virtual keyboard in Kontakt. Careful velocity mapping, perhaps?
> Other point. It will take a lot of practice to play simutaneously on the pitch-bend and mod-wheel to get those scoops & crunches.


----------



## Jonathan Moray

Gene Cornelius said:


> I just finished listening to Gjallarhorn: Grimborg. Any chance those (strings: cello/fiddle) sounds can be emulated with SM Strings? It's that immediacy, that "grit" that I'm after. So hard to define what it is that makes it so hard for me to accept the fact that I spent my money on something so dear, but not getting what others are hearing about it that makes it worth it. The SM strings seem to work ONLY in the distance, swamped in reverb and buried under other instruments. Naked, they lack something, and frankly I'd rather buy multiple sample libraries and live with the limitations of each, than to have infinite frustration.
> 
> Likely my own expectations, I get that.
> 
> As a direct result of not only my dissatisfaction with the SM Strings, but also in an attempt to reconnect with my acoustic/real side of things, I am playing my cellos even more, and almost come to the conclusion that it might actually take less effort to play real instruments. I simply cannot seem to articulate what it is that I am not being satisfied with.
> 
> One of these days Kontakt instrument licenses will be able to be revoked, as it's frustrating that virtual instruments are one of the very rare products that you must buy with absolute faith that it's worth it .. no refunds possible.
> 
> On the flip side of that, I guess I can hold out hope that maybe the next iteration of these strings (a free upgrade?) will hold a lot of serious improvements. If I could articulate my responses better maybe I'd be able to help with those improvements. But right now I need to stop wasting my time fighting with them and get on with actually working. I won't be using these strings though. Damn.



I listened to the Gjallarhorn's album and I'm not clear on what the problem is. Is it the tone of the Fiddle you want to achieve and is unable to? Maybe you should post an example of the sound you are getting out of the instrument and an example of what you want it to sound like. Fiddle playing is so heavily reliant on the player to get that sound.

Also, just to make something clear; Sample Modeling's instruments are highly advanced instruments and not something for beginners. Not only if your a beginner when it comes to mock-ups, but also if you're a beginner when it comes to mixing. They don't sound very good / pretty out of the box but if you know what your doing they are their own instruments. You can really play them and make them sing. I don't own SM Strings yet so can say if this is true for them as well... But I'm rather positive they are judging from Sample Modeling's history as well as the demos provided here.

I also don't see any other product on the market being able to achieve this with any level of playability. I believe AM and SM are the only alternatives. I would love to be proven wrong.

So please, provide an example of the sound (or problem in general) your getting and the sound your after and it might be easier to help you.


----------



## Fa

Vardaro said:


> I agree that we would not get the feedback from the vibrating body back to the string. But the output of the motions of the pickups would exite the "body" IR.
> Is it not similar to convolution reverbs?



Correct. And yes, it's actually convolution. I've no idea of the final result, but I guess it should be very similar to the physical modeling violin products, because actual physical modeling is simulating the strings vibration model and use it to excite a sampled real violin body IR to restore some acoustic fingerprints of the original instrument (beside other modulation and noise generation algorithms of course).


----------



## Gene Cornelius

Yes, ... it is that tone (and others) that are played by real instruments/real players, and I'm unable to get the TONE.

I am thrilled as the rest of you by the level of expressive potential. Yes. Just not the tone. To me it takes both. In fact, perhaps, the way I approach instruments real and virtual is that the tone has to be great, then I can hide behind it in my mediocrity. Is that honest enough assessment? It is true .. for me, even when listening to others' work: Tone is first, expressive/virtuosity second. 

If I can get something I can tolerate I'll post again. I fear my frustration is also coloring my output.



Jonathan Moray said:


> I listened to the Gjallarhorn's album and I'm not clear on what the problem is. Is it the tone of the Fiddle you want to achieve and is unable to?
> 
> ...
> 
> So please, provide an example of the sound (or problem in general) your getting and the sound your after and it might be easier to help you.


----------



## Vardaro

Fa said:


> ..actual physical modeling is simulating the strings vibration mode..


But even on a solid body violin, the real strings will have the various distortions, pitchbends etc which I don't hear in waveguide synthesis, even with added noise elements.


----------



## Fa

Gene Cornelius said:


> I just finished listening to Gjallarhorn: Grimborg. Any chance those (strings: cello/fiddle) sounds can be emulated with SM Strings? It's that immediacy, that "grit" that I'm after. So hard to define what it is that makes it so hard for me to accept the fact that I spent my money on something so dear, but not getting what others are hearing about it that makes it worth it. The SM strings seem to work ONLY in the distance, swamped in reverb and buried under other instruments. Naked, they lack something, and frankly I'd rather buy multiple sample libraries and live with the limitations of each, than to have infinite frustration.
> 
> Likely my own expectations, I get that.
> 
> As a direct result of not only my dissatisfaction with the SM Strings, but also in an attempt to reconnect with my acoustic/real side of things, I am playing my cellos even more, and almost come to the conclusion that it might actually take less effort to play real instruments. I simply cannot seem to articulate what it is that I am not being satisfied with.
> 
> One of these days Kontakt instrument licenses will be able to be revoked, as it's frustrating that virtual instruments are one of the very rare products that you must buy with absolute faith that it's worth it .. no refunds possible.
> 
> On the flip side of that, I guess I can hold out hope that maybe the next iteration of these strings (a free upgrade?) will hold a lot of serious improvements. If I could articulate my responses better maybe I'd be able to help with those improvements. But right now I need to stop wasting my time fighting with them and get on with actually working. I won't be using these strings though. Damn.


Dear Gene,
I also listened to the album to better understand your comments, and I have to agree with the other members comments about the benchmark music, sound and style: this is not something impossible for SM strings, being SM strings probably the best tool on the market to produce this type of music nuances and sound, but it can demand quite a lot of skillful programming and mixing experience (by the way it's the same for real album, mastering this type of tracks is not a trivial task at all).

But i would like to comment on some more general and philosophic statements:
- being frustrated by the difference of real instrument vs. simulation is unavoidable. I think, and I guess all the users agree, that no technology today is able of getting close to the real performance of a good musician for a lot of well known reasons (the limitations in the sound production systems, reproducing just a fraction of the acoustic nuances of a real instrument, due to random and voluntary real time mix of noises and sound a real instrument makes, but also for the interface paradox: even if you had the ultimate violin, able of reproducing all the sound signature of a real violin, how do you interact with it? with keyboard pedals and breath controller? You will still get a kind of organ/sax hybrid input into a string fingered and bowed instrument... no way to make it respond as the real thing. Full stop lol).
Perhaps in the future Artificial Intelligence will make it... who knows... but not today.

- if your aim was to easily recreate complex solo human performance like that, thanks to some technology magics, then you are right: give up, you didn't buy the right tool, but be aware that the right tool is just not existing (yet). Still SM strings are THE tool to make something close, with a pretty detailed programming work, but I suppose from your feedback that it's out of scope for your personal interest.

As a customer I agree with your comments about refund, even if I know the reason why producers can't easily make it (like software producers often) and so I can't comment.

But if at the end this accident drives you to play more your real cello, I think it's not a defeat, it's a big success, take it as a wonderful illumination about the real human touch with music: listening is nice, but playing a vibrant body is the ultimate experience. Never give up on this.


----------



## Jonathan Moray

Gene Cornelius said:


> Yes, ... it is that tone (and others) that are played by real instruments/real players, and I'm unable to get the TONE.
> 
> I am thrilled as the rest of you by the level of expressive potential. Yes. Just not the tone. To me it takes both. In fact, perhaps, the way I approach instruments real and virtual is that the tone has to be great, then I can hide behind it in my mediocrity. Is that honest enough assessment? It is true .. for me, even when listening to others' work: Tone is first, expressive/virtuosity second.
> 
> If I can get something I can tolerate I'll post again. I fear my frustration is also coloring my output.



So you don't want help? Right now it feels like your just complaining without wanting a solution. Based on your previous comments about the sound I think of most us are already excepting it to sound shit, so I would say don't be discouraged to post because of that.

I understand you might be frustrated and wanting to vent for paying what is, for most of us, a lot of money for something that is not the way you want it. But it would really help to hear what your hearing to understand the problem -- _if _you want a solution.

We all have different preferences. I wish the solo Violin would sound like the solo Violin in Assassin's Creed Syndicate soundtrack, or like the Violin sound Ólafur Arnalds often use, or like the Violin in Schindler's List (The original performed by Itzhak Perlman. Looking forward to I like music 's mock-up.) And to be honest I think Sample Modeling Strings is the only one that _might _be able to achieve some resemblance to all of them because of how flexible it is. And, as you've stated before, it will hopefully only get better with future updates.

If I remember correctly you own SM Brass and really liked it. Do you think it sounds the way you want out of the box? For me it dosen't, not even close. It takes a lot of time to get it sounding right, and even more time to be able to play it well.

It would also be good to know what you've tried to get _that _tone? EQ? Timbral-Shaping? Custom IR? Verb? Staturation? Distortion? Trax (as suggested before)?


----------



## I like music

Jonathan Moray said:


> So you don't want help? Right now it feels like your just complaining without wanting a solution. Based on your previous comments about the sound I think of most us are already excepting it to sound shit, so I would say don't be discouraged to post because of that.
> 
> I understand you might be frustrated and wanting to vent for paying what is, for most of us, a lot of money for something that is not the way you want it. But it would really help to hear what your hearing to understand the problem -- _if _you want a solution.
> 
> We all have different preferences. I wish the solo Violin would sound like the solo Violin in Assassin's Creed Syndicate soundtrack, or like the Violin sound Ólafur Arnalds often use, or like the Violin in Schindler's List (The original performed by Itzhak Perlman. Looking forward to I like music 's mock-up.) And to be honest I think Sample Modeling Strings is the only one that _might _be able to achieve some resemblance to all of them because of how flexible it is. And, as you've stated before, it will hopefully only get better with future updates.
> 
> If I remember correctly you own SM Brass and really liked it. Do you think it sounds the way you want out of the box? For me it dosen't, not even close. It takes a lot of time to get it sounding right, and even more time to be able to play it well.
> 
> It would also be good to know what you've tried to get _that _tone? EQ? Timbral-Shaping? Custom IR? Verb? Staturation? Distortion? Trax (as suggested before)?



I've actually done the violin part, finished it last night. I'm very nervous about posting it, because as I had said, I've only _just_ got hold of the library, and this was my first pass (and I have absolutely _no_ mixing and engineering/mastering skills whatsoever). Might post it at the end of the day naked in any case, as the rest of the mockup will probably take me a long time, due to the fact that I'll only have an hour a night to work on it ...

I had a question for the room. I've done some portamento slides, like Giorgio suggested. It is a neat trick. What I'm wondering is if it is possible to do the following using any of the timbral shapping or harmonics stuff.

As the slide happens, I'm _imagining_ that the violinist's pressure on the string lessens a bit (I'm talking about the left hand). In Schindler's List, you can hear this really _delicate_ sound as he transitions up (or down) in a lot of instances. Can any players advise on if that delicate sound has a bit more of a harmonics/overtones heavy sound? Feels like there's less pressure and so you get this bell-like quality in the transitions (in the real performance). *If* that's the case, then I wonder if there's a way to replicate that in SM.


----------



## Jonathan Moray

I like music said:


> I've actually done the violin part, finished it last night. I'm very nervous about posting it, because as I had said, I've only _just_ got hold of the library, and this was my first pass (and I have absolutely _no_ mixing and engineering/mastering skills whatsoever). Might post it at the end of the day naked in any case, as the rest of the mockup will probably take me a long time, due to the fact that I'll only have an hour a night to work on it ...
> 
> I had a question for the room. I've done some portamento slides, like Giorgio suggested. It is a neat trick. What I'm wondering is if it is possible to do the following using any of the timbral shapping or harmonics stuff.
> 
> As the slide happens, I'm _imagining_ that the violinist's pressure on the string lessens a bit (I'm talking about the left hand). In Schindler's List, you can hear this really _delicate_ sound as he transitions up (or down) in a lot of instances. Can any players advise on if that delicate sound has a bit more of a harmonics/overtones heavy sound? Feels like there's less pressure and so you get this bell-like quality in the transitions (in the real performance). *If* that's the case, then I wonder if there's a way to replicate that in SM.



Maybe CC22? It controls overtones.

Extract from the manual:


> CC22: overtones. This control allows to imitate the typical out-of-Helmholtz sound produced by a transient mismatch between bow pressure and speed. This sound can be occasionally heard during the performance of even excellent string players. It reminds the overblow of a flute, as if only the odd harmonics were present. This effect, if used sparingly and transiently may contribute to realism.


----------



## I like music

Jonathan Moray said:


> Maybe CC22? It controls overtones.
> 
> Extract from the manual:



Ah of course, forgot about this one! Might try that shortly. Thanks


----------



## Vardaro

I like music said:


> As the slide happens, I'm _imagining_ that the violinist's pressure on the string lessens a bit (I'm talking about the left hand)


Indeed!


----------



## I like music

Vardaro said:


> Indeed!



I'm actually learning to play the violin (total beginner, so haven't even left the first scale they teach, or done more than a whole-tone leap, but it is handy to have the real instrument around, as even a beginner can _tell_ how it would be played. Now I wish I could buy every instrument in the orchestra, just to learn these things)


----------



## I like music

Posting the Schindler's List "violin only" mockup. *Before* you press play, please note:

1) This is pretty much the first thing I did with the library, so _I've baredly scratched the surface._
2) There are a lot of rough edges (transitions that I didn't tweak - those are my fault, not the library's)
3) The 1st half of the mockup is much worse than the 2nd half. That is because by the time I got to the second half, I had learned a lot about the library. I just didn't have the time to go back and correct a lot of things in the 1st half.
4) No EQ etc. Just Cubase's reverb (used the Dutch hall *which does tend to darken the tone of every library*).


----------



## Jonathan Moray

I like music said:


> Posting the Schindler's List "violin only" mockup. *Before* you press play, please note:
> 
> 1) This is pretty much the first thing I did with the library, so _I've baredly scratched the surface._
> 2) There are a lot of rough edges (transitions that I didn't tweak - those are my fault, not the library's)
> 3) The 1st half of the mockup is much worse than the 2nd half. That is because by the time I got to the second half, I had learned a lot about the library. I just didn't have the time to go back and correct a lot of things in the 1st half.
> 4) No EQ etc. Just Cubase's reverb (used the Dutch hall *which does tend to darken the tone of every library*).




Wow... I actually quite like it. The tone overall is good and I really like the noisy overtones. Honestly, I wasn't excepting it to sound this good. Not perfect. The midi data could be refined and work on, but a great first attempt. I agree that it's a noticeable improvement in the second part.


----------



## I like music

Jonathan Moray said:


> Wow... I actually quite like it. The tone overall is good and I really like the noisy overtones. Honestly, I wasn't excepting it to sound this good. Not perfect. The midi data could be refined and work on, but a great first attempt. I agree that it's a noticeable improvement in the second part.



Aye, thing is I've been listening to this so much that I need to take a day off and hear it with fresh ears. Yeah, MIDI data I'm going to try to tweak some more, but since I'm a rank amateur, I usually break more things than I fix, when I try to improve these things.


----------



## Jonathan Moray

I like music said:


> Aye, thing is I've been listening to this so much that I need to take a day off and hear it with fresh ears. Yeah, MIDI data I'm going to try to tweak some more, but since I'm a rank amateur, I usually break more things than I fix, when I try to improve these things.



There's a few things I could point out. Just from two listens and comparing yours to the original recording.

First it's the tone. Yours is a little more bottom heavy while his has less low and more mid-highs. There's also some odd overtones in your version -- the same problem, to my ears at least, is present in SM French Horns as well. It's kind of hard to EQ out, not impossible just hard, Timbral Shaping might help.

I like the noisiness of the Violin, but it's too much. Dial it back a bit and only use it sparingly, and more in only certain parts.

Itzhak's vibrato is also more deliberate and pronounced. Deliberate might not be the right word, but it's not as "blurry" as in your version. Not sure how to fix this though.

The original, at parts, is also a bit more dynamic. For example in the 2nd half of your test, in the first phrase where the Violin goes down to the D, Itzhak lets the D almost fade out before going down to the E. Phrasing is so extremely important for a realistic performance.

Lastly, it would be nice if normalize your tracks before posting. It's really quiet.

Hope at least some of this was helpful.

Once again, good job. Looking forward to hearing what improvements you will make.


----------



## I like music

Jonathan Moray said:


> There's a few things I could point out. Just from two listens and comparing yours to the original recording.
> 
> First it's the tone. Yours is a little more bottom heavy while his has less low and more mid-highs. There's also some odd overtones in your version -- the same problem, to my ears at least, is present in SM French Horns as well. It's kind of hard to EQ out, not impossible just hard, Timbral Shaping might help.
> 
> I like the noisiness of the Violin, but it's too much. Dial it back a bit and only use it sparingly, and more in only certain parts.
> 
> Itzhak's vibrato is also more deliberate and pronounced. Deliberate might not be the right word, but it's not as "blurry" as in your version. Not sure how to fix this though.
> 
> The original, at parts, is also a bit more dynamic. For example in the 2nd half of your test, in the first phrase where the Violin goes down to the D, Itzhak lets the D almost fade out before going down to the E. Phrasing is so extremely important for a realistic performance.
> 
> Lastly, it would be nice if normalize your tracks before posting. It's really quiet.
> 
> Hope at least some of this was helpful.
> 
> Once again, good job. Looking forward to hearing what improvements you will make.



Thank you for the feedback. That's really helpful! Yes, those happen to be the exact things that I had listed out to fix for myself, so I'm glad you noticed.

Regarding the vibrato, I followed the lead from one of his performance on _where_ to place most of the vibrato, but I didn't spend time tweaking the depth (and especially speed) of the vibrato, which once I go over this again, will make it sound much better.

As to the dynamics quality, I learned after I finished, that with the SM violin, there's a complex interaction between dynamics and the volume, meaning that there's a specific way to really make the violin go down in perceived volume as well as timbre. I do not quite understand this relationship, but I'm going to ask Giorgio. So completely agreed, this was one of the biggest glaring differences for me between what I'd done.

In terms of tone, I'll EQ, but I really don't know what i'm doing with EQ except to have the track playing, and the fiddle iwth the different frequencies until it "sounds" right. I'm assuming EQ is simply a trial-and-error process and using your ears?

Regarding normalisation, I've never done it! Don't know how, so any resources you could point me towards would be hugely helpful! FWIW this was the standard volume out of the instrument (set at 0) and then through the chain I didn't reduce volumes, but it seems that through my machine, for reason, these things are coming out very quiet. *SIGH* Another thing to add to the list of things to learn :D


----------



## I like music

[QUOTE="
I like the noisiness of the Violin, but it's too much. Dial it back a bit and only use it sparingly, and more in only certain parts.
[/QUOTE]

Sorry, one question. I wasn't sure what you meant by noisiness.

Regarding the blurry vibrato, I think that might be something I can tweak. Exciting, and once again thanks for your feedback.


----------



## Jonathan Moray

I like music said:


> Sorry, one question. I wasn't sure what you meant by noisiness.
> 
> Regarding the blurry vibrato, I think that might be something I can tweak. Exciting, and once again thanks for your feedback.



Yes, absolutely. I think it's the noise of the bow against the strings. SM Strings is most likely recorded closer than the Schindler's List recording which I would say contributes to the noise and a more close and detailed sound. Not sure if detailed is the right word. Anyway, I would venture a guess and say that it's CC21 that determine the noise I'm thinking of.

I made a quick mix of your SoundCloud file to get it a little bit closer to the original. The noise is more noticeable in my mix than yours since I raised the highs a bit. But it's still noticeable in your mix.

The noise can be heard through out. It's somewhat noticeable at the beginning . But it's very noticeable at exactly 35s in the file I attached.


----------



## I like music

Jonathan Moray said:


> Yes, absolutely. I think it's the noise of the bow against the strings. SM Strings is most likely recorded closer than the Schindler's List recording which I would say contributes to the noise and a more close and detailed sound. Not sure if detailed is the right word. Anyway, I would venture a guess and say that it's CC21 that determine the noise I'm thinking of.
> 
> I made a quick mix of your SoundCloud file to get it a little bit closer to the original. The noise is more noticeable in my mix than yours since I raised the highs a bit. But it's still noticeable in your mix.
> 
> The noise can be heard through out. It's somewhat noticeable at the beginning . But it's very noticeable at exactly 35s in the file I attached.



Ah yes, I also noticed that! I asked about the noise earlier, and it seems like the noise is there even as I reduce bow-noise to a minimum. Possibly a consequence of the recording technique/distance when the SM team was recording this? I'm not sure there's a way to remove this from the natural sound via the GUI (at least I can't find one), so I'm assuming it'd need some kind of external plugin to do it. Fa kindly suggested something and I'm going to look into it.


----------



## Vardaro

Page14, CC21: bow noise
+/-6dB from the original recording...

Edit : I found just one note (A=880Hz) very strident , in the first half of the Soundcloud file (on both headphones and monitors), but not in the second half.
Is it me, or my soundcard, or summat?


----------



## I like music

Vardaro said:


> Page14, CC21: bow noise
> +/-6dB from the original recording...



I had it pulled down to 0, I'm fairly sure. I'l triple-check.


----------



## Gene Cornelius

No, help is good, and if I can get it I do want it. I keep trying the suggestions and the more I mess with it the less I like it. In fact, the converse is true: The more I mess with it, the more I like the out of the box sound. 

I have not tried any external plugins other than other 'verbs. I am literally out of money, so anything I don't already have I won't be getting for a while. Most of my attempts have been centered around the attack, bow noise, timbral shaping, overtones, and IR ... although again, I dont' really hear the IR differences???

I DO like the out of the box sound of the SM Brass! THen I step back and pick up my euphonium or trumpet (neither of which I play well enough to record anything more than basics) and then back to the SM brass, and with the ONLY thing wrong I'm hearing/feeling with the SM Brass being the fact that the tail end of the note gets truncated when using breath control, it's as realistic as I want.

I am not a rank beginner in either mixing or recording, not to say I'm pro/talented, but my name is on plenty of records for whatever that's worth. Newer, but not totally unfamiliar with editing MIDI parameters, and more blockhanded at that than real recording. (I was a better tracking engineer than mixing, that's for sure)

I am not interested in doing mockups. I wonder if I SHOULD? Maybe try the Bach Cello Suite 1 Prelude as example, since that is something I can occasionally actually play for real.

It is also very possible that my perceived issues are a matter of perspective. I enjoy the instruments more when I hear others' work ... 

But after this busy time I'll try to get something so we can work on specifics rather than abstract "I just don't like it" stuff.

Thanks.



Jonathan Moray said:


> So you don't want help? Right now it feels like your just complaining without wanting a solution. Based on your previous comments about the sound I think of most us are already excepting it to sound shit, so I would say don't be discouraged to post because of that.
> 
> I understand you might be frustrated and wanting to vent for paying what is, for most of us, a lot of money for something that is not the way you want it. But it would really help to hear what your hearing to understand the problem -- _if _you want a solution.
> 
> We all have different preferences. I wish the solo Violin would sound like the solo Violin in Assassin's Creed Syndicate soundtrack, or like the Violin sound Ólafur Arnalds often use, or like the Violin in Schindler's List (The original performed by Itzhak Perlman. Looking forward to I like music 's mock-up.) And to be honest I think Sample Modeling Strings is the only one that _might _be able to achieve some resemblance to all of them because of how flexible it is. And, as you've stated before, it will hopefully only get better with future updates.
> 
> If I remember correctly you own SM Brass and really liked it. Do you think it sounds the way you want out of the box? For me it dosen't, not even close. It takes a lot of time to get it sounding right, and even more time to be able to play it well.
> 
> It would also be good to know what you've tried to get _that _tone? EQ? Timbral-Shaping? Custom IR? Verb? Staturation? Distortion? Trax (as suggested before)?


----------



## I like music

Vardaro said:


> Page14, CC21: bow noise
> +/-6dB from the original recording...
> 
> Edit : I found just one note (A=880Hz) very strident , in the first half of the Soundcloud file (on both headphones and monitors), but not in the second half.
> Is it me, or my soundcard, or summat?





Vardaro said:


> Page14, CC21: bow noise
> +/-6dB from the original recording...
> 
> Edit : I found just one note (A=880Hz) very strident , in the first half of the Soundcloud file (on both headphones and monitors), but not in the second half.
> Is it me, or my soundcard, or summat?


I think I know which one you mean from memory. There WAS one which was strident (best description for what I was wrestling with) so I'm assuming it is the same. I'll look at it and try to tweak.


----------



## Vardaro

Bow noise is present for the violinist, more oso for the cellist,
but is less audible from a from a distance.


----------



## servandus

Not yet there, but getting closer by the day to what I expect from these strings. I made this basically as a bowing/phrasing etude, just to learn the basics of the library, so no fancy things yet soundwise (no trimbral shaping, no external ERs/reverb, no EQ..., everything sounding right out of the box, with just a bit of exciter and multiband compression in the master bus). Want to learn how to play these instruments, and focus on the performance first; I'll take care of the sound later. Even so, this library is already giving me things that no other library is capable of.


----------



## servandus

Have I told you how much I adore Soundcloud?: _"It looks like your track "Samplemodeling Strings (W. A. Mozart: Divertimento KV. 136 - III. Presto)" might contain or be a copy of "3. Presto" by Saito Kinen Orchestra, Seiji Ozawa, which is owned by owned by Decca Music Group Ltd. in certain territories. As a result, your track has been removed from your profile for the time being."_

While soundcloud resolves the copyright dispute, here is a dropbox link:

W. A. Mozart: Divertimento KV. 136 - III. Presto


----------



## Jonathan Moray

Gene Cornelius said:


> No, help is good, and if I can get it I do want it. I keep trying the suggestions and the more I mess with it the less I like it. In fact, the converse is true: The more I mess with it, the more I like the out of the box sound.
> 
> I have not tried any external plugins other than other 'verbs. I am literally out of money, so anything I don't already have I won't be getting for a while. Most of my attempts have been centered around the attack, bow noise, timbral shaping, overtones, and IR ... although again, I dont' really hear the IR differences???
> 
> I DO like the out of the box sound of the SM Brass! THen I step back and pick up my euphonium or trumpet (neither of which I play well enough to record anything more than basics) and then back to the SM brass, and with the ONLY thing wrong I'm hearing/feeling with the SM Brass being the fact that the tail end of the note gets truncated when using breath control, it's as realistic as I want.
> 
> I am not a rank beginner in either mixing or recording, not to say I'm pro/talented, but my name is on plenty of records for whatever that's worth. Newer, but not totally unfamiliar with editing MIDI parameters, and more blockhanded at that than real recording. (I was a better tracking engineer than mixing, that's for sure)
> 
> I am not interested in doing mockups. I wonder if I SHOULD? Maybe try the Bach Cello Suite 1 Prelude as example, since that is something I can occasionally actually play for real.
> 
> It is also very possible that my perceived issues are a matter of perspective. I enjoy the instruments more when I hear others' work ...
> [...]



I see. It sounds like you're at least a somewhat competent mix-engineer, and should be able to figure out the mixing aspect of your problem. That's why it's so important for us to hear an example. I've seen people complain about library saying it won't get loud enough even when at the highest Velocity and CC. The problem turned out to be they used CC7, which is standard for just Volume control, to try and control dynamics.

But since you own SM Brass already and know how use that one I would guess your problem is not something that obvious. SM Brass and SM Strings should be somewhat the same when it comes to controlling them.



Gene Cornelius said:


> [...]
> But after this busy time I'll try to get something so we can work on specifics rather than abstract "I just don't like it" stuff.
> 
> Thanks.



That would be great. Looking forward to it.


----------



## Jonathan Moray

servandus said:


> Have I told you how much I adore Soundcloud?: _"It looks like your track "Samplemodeling Strings (W. A. Mozart: Divertimento KV. 136 - III. Presto)" might contain or be a copy of "3. Presto" by Saito Kinen Orchestra, Seiji Ozawa, which is owned by owned by Decca Music Group Ltd. in certain territories. As a result, your track has been removed from your profile for the time being."_
> 
> While soundcloud resolves the copyright dispute, here is a dropbox link:
> 
> W. A. Mozart: Divertimento KV. 136 - III. Presto



Yeah, SoundCloud is as bad as ever.

It sounds alright. The performance is quite good, it could use some work at places but I'm not that familiar with the piece so can't say all too much. Also, the recordings I found of it online where of a quartet playing, not a small chamber ensemble, which I suspect your version is from how it sounds. How big is the ensemble?

It also needs more bite. It's a little tame and on the soft side, making it sound too sterile in my opinion. Did you try using CC21 and CC22 for Bow Noise and Overtones? And maybe CC28 for attack detuning? Otherwise you should be able to use the pitch bend to add _very _subtle pitch fluctuations in the runs for example. Is it possible to get more bite on the attack as well?

Might be because of the lack of mixing though as you mentioned. I'm not sure. But I think it sounds pretty good for a out-of-the-box sound.

I also agree that I doubt there's many libraries out there that could handle this type of piece and still sound this good.


----------



## I like music

servandus said:


> Have I told you how much I adore Soundcloud?: _"It looks like your track "Samplemodeling Strings (W. A. Mozart: Divertimento KV. 136 - III. Presto)" might contain or be a copy of "3. Presto" by Saito Kinen Orchestra, Seiji Ozawa, which is owned by owned by Decca Music Group Ltd. in certain territories. As a result, your track has been removed from your profile for the time being."_
> 
> While soundcloud resolves the copyright dispute, here is a dropbox link:
> 
> W. A. Mozart: Divertimento KV. 136 - III. Presto



Hah, Soundcloud. I like this. I can't see other libraries being able to do this phrasing. Could you tell us about what size ensemble you used here?


----------



## eli0s

servandus said:


> W. A. Mozart: Divertimento KV. 136 - III. Presto


This actually sounds really good! Thank you for sharing!
Can you tell us what parameters you used for this result? I guess it goes with out saying that CC11+CC1 are the default, have you used any other CCs to "sculpt" the performance?


----------



## I like music

eli0s said:


> This actually sounds really good! Thank you for sharing!
> Can you tell us what parameters you used for this result? I guess it goes with out saying that CC11+CC1 are the default, have you used any other CCs to "sculpt" the performance?



What's funny is how responsive the strings are to a number of those cc inputs (e.g. if you slow the tempo down a tiny bit on a note and then add some vibrato just in those few milliseconds, it has an effect). I'm only talking about the solos, but so far, very impressed. And yes, I liked that Mozart a lot. Have you got the strings?


----------



## eli0s

I like music said:


> What's funny is how responsive the strings are to a number of those cc inputs (e.g. if you slow the tempo down a tiny bit on a note and then add some vibrato just in those few milliseconds, it has an effect). I'm only talking about the solos, but so far, very impressed. And yes, I liked that Mozart a lot. Have you got the strings?


No, I don't have them yet, I really wish to convince my self to buy them, but my financial state at the moment dictates me to be obselutly sure that I won't regret it afterwards... 
If I get them it will be for using them as a main string library, replacing CSS +CSSS, which are my default goto strings, and I am comfortable with them, I have to be sure that investing time and money in SM strings will worth it.
You see, I own the previous solo strings (now under audiomodeling's care) and I don't use them at all. I tried to like them but the timbre is throwing me off. I fear the same might happen with SM Strings and I just can't afford it. 
That is why I am hoping for a walkthrough video to better understand how this library might fit my needs and workflow.


----------



## Montisquirrel

servandus said:


> Have I told you how much I adore Soundcloud?: _"It looks like your track "Samplemodeling Strings (W. A. Mozart: Divertimento KV. 136 - III. Presto)" might contain or be a copy of "3. Presto" by Saito Kinen Orchestra, Seiji Ozawa, which is owned by owned by Decca Music Group Ltd. in certain territories. As a result, your track has been removed from your profile for the time being."_
> 
> While soundcloud resolves the copyright dispute, here is a dropbox link:
> 
> W. A. Mozart: Divertimento KV. 136 - III. Presto




I have not read the whole thread and not listend to all the demos, but this one sounds really really good in my ears!!


----------



## DANIELE

I like music said:


> Hah, Soundcloud. I like this. I can't see other libraries being able to do this phrasing. Could you tell us about what size ensemble you used here?



Yeah I think the same, there's no other library out there that could do this without tweaking them as hell (and maybe even if you tweak them).


----------



## servandus

Jonathan Moray said:


> It also needs more bite. It's a little tame and on the soft side, making it sound too sterile in my opinion. Did you try using CC21 and CC22 for Bow Noise and Overtones? And maybe CC28 for attack detuning?




Maybe, but you know, after all it's Mozart, so I went more for bouncing spiccati rather than heavy attacks here, trying to make it sound spirited, and natural, not too hyped (same with vibrato, articulation, timbre, ensemble size, etc.). Anything but dogmatic, though definitely a bit in the direction of a historical performance. In any case, you might be right about sounding sterile of course (it's just a deliberate, stylistic choice here, not a library issue). CC21 & CC22 wouldn't make such a big difference here though, imo (CC21 controls the bow noise during the bowing, not affecting the attack particularly, and the kind of sonic artifacts CC22 brings about to the sound doesn't help with bite either; both CCs change the timbre considerably during the sustain, but have little to no effect on the attacks, at least to my ears). But it's certainly possible to get more bite with a little more bow contact on the strings (i.e. slightly longer note durations) and higher CC11/vel values, though the quality of the sound could be easily lost (on-string staccato lacks the resonance of the vibrating strings that off-string spiccato produces, and SM strings mimic that behaviour quite convincingly). CC28 could help for sure with the "realism" of fast passages in solo performances, but in ensembles I find the built-in detuning does the job by itself. In any case, for sure you could play with these things if you find it too "clean" for your taste (this, in fact, is what I love about this kind of libraries, that you can do almost whatever you want with them)



I like music said:


> Hah, Soundcloud. I like this. I can't see other libraries being able to do this phrasing. Could you tell us about what size ensemble you used here?



Small/medium ensembles (except for the bassi), layered with soloists (to give it more clarity and presence... and as a test for possible phasing issues, I must confess). I find layering also helps to shrink the perceived size of the ensemble (which I was also after). I also wanted to check if the same midi data produces the same results for soloists and ensembles: it does, and I really like that. Layering could bring some issues though, depending on the musical context and/or if you're not careful enough with IRs, etc.



eli0s said:


> This actually sounds really good! Thank you for sharing!
> 
> Can you tell us what parameters you used for this result? I guess it goes with out saying that CC11+CC1 are the default, have you used any other CCs to "sculpt" the performance?



No, just expression and vibrato intensity (vibrato rate is fixed because, at such fast tempi, modulating the rate doesn't make much sense). Every other controller which contributes to the sound/performance was also fixed from start to end.



I like music said:


> What's funny is how responsive the strings are to a number of those cc inputs (e.g. if you slow the tempo down a tiny bit on a note and then add some vibrato just in those few milliseconds, it has an effect)



You can say that again: same CC11 value, same note duration... just increase the velocity by 1 in certain ranges and the quality of the sound can change dramatically from a very resonant spiccato to a quite dry staccato. I wish this kind of things were clearly specified in the manual. It takes some trial and error to figure out how the instruments behave. It's clear that, even if they respond extremely well to continuous changes, there're kind of "quantum" leaps in the continuum which somehow resembles the velocity layers of traditional libraries. 

I find that legato and "longs" are a pleasure to work with, but detaché and "shorts" are kind of a pain right now for me, precisely for that reason (measured tremoli is something I'm still struggling with, for example). Well, let's see it as a challenge. One thing is clear, though: this is not, say, Jasper Blunk's Oceania, with which you can do only one thing, but you can do it right away extremely well. On the contrary, there's so much to learn to make this library do exactly what you want it to.



eli0s said:


> If I get them it will be for using them as a main string library, replacing CSS +CSSS, which are my default goto strings, and I am comfortable with them, I have to be sure that investing time and money in SM strings will worth it.



I could have written that myself, eli0s. No doubt CSS(S) has a wonderful sound right out of the box, and a scripting that does wonders with it. I love it. But as good as it is, it's quite limited in certain musical contexts. I would say, SM strings are, to some extent, quite the opposite: takes time to master, but the flexibility it offers is unparalleled. To quote Saxer here:



Saxer said:


> If you work like: Oh, this sounds really nice, what can I do with it? - Go for SCS. If you work like: This are the things I want them to play, what library can do this? - Go for SM. Better: get both.



I resonated a lot with that, and I think what he said about SCS could also be said about CSS (or any other "traditional", good string library). I also see them (CSS and SM) working sinergetically to some extent. Can't confirm that yet, though.



Montisquirrel said:


> I have not read the whole thread and not listend to all the demos, but this one sounds really really good in my ears!!



Glad you liked it!



DANIELE said:


> Yeah I think the same, there's no other library out there that could do this without tweaking them as hell (and maybe even if you tweak them).



In a sense, trying to perform a piece of music organically out of different pre-recorded articulations is like trying to recreate a human being out of different body parts: if you work hard enough, know what you're doing, and, above all, avoid writing things that the library can't manage, you can get "the most beautiful Frankenstein" one could possibly dream of. Of course, absolutely nothing wrong with it, quite on the contrary, but the moment you want the monster to stretch... then it hurts.

Pure synthesis allows much more flexibility at the cost of timbral beauty, and elegance. It's like a constant struggle between sound & performance. I guess when it comes to VIs, in the search for "realism", we tend to focus much more on the sound ... but you give me the Lady Blunt Stradivarius and I will show you how "unreal" it can sound in the wrong hands. For me personally it's the other way around, but to sound neutral here, let's say performance is at least as important as timbre for musical expression and beauty.

Although sample based, SM works clearly differently from traditional libraries, allowing much more flexibility. I hope its hybrid approach could someday bridge the gap, and bring to the table the best of these two aspects. That's why I find libraries such as SM or Aaron's Infinite Series much more interesting to follow. But then I listen to Andy Blaney's BBC orchestral demo, and I relax from any dogmatism. Let every developer provide us with the best products they can come up with, and let'us suffer not being millionaires  I must be a little masochistic, cause I really enjoy each new release, even if I can't afford to purchase it.

I'm glad I got these strings. From the things I tried so far I could see me using it in 3 different contexts:

1) As a NotePerformer "on steroids" (strings only) for the DAW. An example of this is the Sakamoto track I uploaded earlier in this thread. Load the midi file, blow your BC, and enjoy.

2) As a layering lib to enrich the sound of other strings or hide their flaws.

3) As a main library that provides better performance in more complex musical contexts (this Mozart divertimento could be an example)

Next I think I'll try something more lyrical. I'll post it if I can make it sound decent.


----------



## Jonathan Moray

servandus said:


> Maybe, but you know, after all it's Mozart, so I went more for bouncing spiccati rather than heavy attacks here, trying to make it sound spirited, and natural, not too hyped (same with vibrato, articulation, timbre, ensemble size, etc.). Anything but dogmatic, though definitely a bit in the direction of a historical performance. In any case, you might be right about sounding sterile of course (it's just a deliberate, stylistic choice here, not a library issue). CC21 & CC22 wouldn't make such a big difference here though, imo (CC21 controls the bow noise during the bowing, not affecting the attack particularly, and the kind of sonic artifacts CC22 brings about to the sound doesn't help with bite either; both CCs change the timbre considerably during the sustain, but have little to no effect on the attacks, at least to my ears). But it's certainly possible to get more bite with a little more bow contact on the strings (i.e. slightly longer note durations) and higher CC11/vel values, though the quality of the sound could be easily lost (on-string staccato lacks the resonance of the vibrating strings that off-string spiccato produces, and SM strings mimic that behaviour quite convincingly). CC28 could help for sure with the "realism" of fast passages in solo performances, but in ensembles I find the built-in detuning does the job by itself. In any case, for sure you could play with these things if you find it too "clean" for your taste (this, in fact, is what I love about this kind of libraries, that you can do almost whatever you want with them)
> 
> 
> 
> Small/medium ensembles (except for the bassi), layered with soloists (to give it more clarity and presence... and as a test for possible phasing issues, I must confess). I find layering also helps to shrink the perceived size of the ensemble (which I was also after). I also wanted to check if the same midi data produces the same results for soloists and ensembles: it does, and I really like that. Layering could bring some issues though, depending on the musical context and/or if you're not careful enough with IRs, etc.
> 
> 
> 
> No, just expression and vibrato intensity (vibrato rate is fixed because, at such fast tempi, modulating the rate doesn't make much sense). Every other controller which contributes to the sound/performance was also fixed from start to end.
> 
> 
> 
> You can say that again: same CC11 value, same note duration... just increase the velocity by 1 in certain ranges and the quality of the sound can change dramatically from a very resonant spiccato to a quite dry staccato. I wish this kind of things were clearly specified in the manual. It takes some trial and error to figure out how the instruments behave. It's clear that, even if they respond extremely well to continuous changes, there're kind of "quantum" leaps in the continuum which somehow resembles the velocity layers of traditional libraries.
> 
> I find that legato and "longs" are a pleasure to work with, but detaché and "shorts" are kind of a pain right now for me, precisely for that reason (measured tremoli is something I'm still struggling with, for example). Well, let's see it as a challenge. One thing is clear, though: this is not, say, Jasper Blunk's Oceania, with which you can do only one thing, but you can do it right away extremely well. On the contrary, there's so much to learn to make this library do exactly what you want it to.
> 
> 
> 
> I could have written that myself, eli0s. No doubt CSS(S) has a wonderful sound right out of the box, and a scripting that does wonders with it. I love it. But as good as it is, it's quite limited in certain musical contexts. I would say, SM strings are, to some extent, quite the opposite: takes time to master, but the flexibility it offers is unparalleled. To quote Saxer here:
> 
> 
> 
> I resonated a lot with that, and I think what he said about SCS could also be said about CSS (or any other "traditional", good string library). I also see them (CSS and SM) working sinergetically to some extent. Can't confirm that yet, though.
> 
> 
> 
> Glad you liked it!
> 
> 
> 
> In a sense, trying to perform a piece of music organically out of different pre-recorded articulations is like trying to recreate a human being out of different body parts: if you work hard enough, know what you're doing, and, above all, avoid writing things that the library can't manage, you can get "the most beautiful Frankenstein" one could possibly dream of. Of course, absolutely nothing wrong with it, quite on the contrary, but the moment you want the monster to stretch... then it hurts.
> 
> Pure synthesis allows much more flexibility at the cost of timbral beauty, and elegance. It's like a constant struggle between sound & performance. I guess when it comes to VIs, in the search for "realism", we tend to focus much more on the sound ... but you give me the Lady Blunt Stradivarius and I will show you how "unreal" it can sound in the wrong hands. For me personally it's the other way around, but to sound neutral here, let's say performance is at least as important as timbre for musical expression and beauty.
> 
> Although sample based, SM works clearly differently from traditional libraries, allowing much more flexibility. I hope its hybrid approach could someday bridge the gap, and bring to the table the best of these two aspects. That's why I find libraries such as SM or Aaron's Infinite Series much more interesting to follow. But then I listen to Andy Blaney's BBC orchestral demo, and I relax from any dogmatism. Let every developer provide us with the best products they can come up with, and let'us suffer not being millionaires  I must be a little masochistic, cause I really enjoy each new release, even if I can't afford to purchase it.
> 
> I'm glad I got these strings. From the things I tried so far I could see me using it in 3 different contexts:
> 
> 1) As a NotePerformer "on steroids" (strings only) for the DAW. An example of this is the Sakamoto track I uploaded earlier in this thread. Load the midi file, blow your BC, and enjoy.
> 
> 2) As a layering lib to enrich the sound of other strings or hide their flaws.
> 
> 3) As a main library that provides better performance in more complex musical contexts (this Mozart divertimento could be an example)
> 
> Next I think I'll try something more lyrical. I'll post it if I can make it sound decent.



Great write up! I agree with everything you've said.

And you're absolutely right about the tone/bite of the strings; it's only my own personal appraisal of what I would like the strings to sound like and what I find is missing when listening to a real recording of the same piece.

I actually downloaded the file and listened to it a couple more times and it does sound really good. I added some minor EQ and some more verb and for me it sounds even little bit better. I think the tone I'm hearing would work great for most uses. Although I would still like to hear a demo where the sound has more bite/grit, especially the short notes.

Really looking forward to hearing something a bit more lyrical.


----------



## I like music

servandus said:


> Maybe, but you know, after all it's Mozart, so I went more for bouncing spiccati rather than heavy attacks here, trying to make it sound spirited, and natural, not too hyped (same with vibrato, articulation, timbre, ensemble size, etc.). Anything but dogmatic, though definitely a bit in the direction of a historical performance. In any case, you might be right about sounding sterile of course (it's just a deliberate, stylistic choice here, not a library issue). CC21 & CC22 wouldn't make such a big difference here though, imo (CC21 controls the bow noise during the bowing, not affecting the attack particularly, and the kind of sonic artifacts CC22 brings about to the sound doesn't help with bite either; both CCs change the timbre considerably during the sustain, but have little to no effect on the attacks, at least to my ears). But it's certainly possible to get more bite with a little more bow contact on the strings (i.e. slightly longer note durations) and higher CC11/vel values, though the quality of the sound could be easily lost (on-string staccato lacks the resonance of the vibrating strings that off-string spiccato produces, and SM strings mimic that behaviour quite convincingly). CC28 could help for sure with the "realism" of fast passages in solo performances, but in ensembles I find the built-in detuning does the job by itself. In any case, for sure you could play with these things if you find it too "clean" for your taste (this, in fact, is what I love about this kind of libraries, that you can do almost whatever you want with them)
> 
> 
> 
> Small/medium ensembles (except for the bassi), layered with soloists (to give it more clarity and presence... and as a test for possible phasing issues, I must confess). I find layering also helps to shrink the perceived size of the ensemble (which I was also after). I also wanted to check if the same midi data produces the same results for soloists and ensembles: it does, and I really like that. Layering could bring some issues though, depending on the musical context and/or if you're not careful enough with IRs, etc.
> 
> 
> 
> No, just expression and vibrato intensity (vibrato rate is fixed because, at such fast tempi, modulating the rate doesn't make much sense). Every other controller which contributes to the sound/performance was also fixed from start to end.
> 
> 
> 
> You can say that again: same CC11 value, same note duration... just increase the velocity by 1 in certain ranges and the quality of the sound can change dramatically from a very resonant spiccato to a quite dry staccato. I wish this kind of things were clearly specified in the manual. It takes some trial and error to figure out how the instruments behave. It's clear that, even if they respond extremely well to continuous changes, there're kind of "quantum" leaps in the continuum which somehow resembles the velocity layers of traditional libraries.
> 
> I find that legato and "longs" are a pleasure to work with, but detaché and "shorts" are kind of a pain right now for me, precisely for that reason (measured tremoli is something I'm still struggling with, for example). Well, let's see it as a challenge. One thing is clear, though: this is not, say, Jasper Blunk's Oceania, with which you can do only one thing, but you can do it right away extremely well. On the contrary, there's so much to learn to make this library do exactly what you want it to.
> 
> 
> 
> I could have written that myself, eli0s. No doubt CSS(S) has a wonderful sound right out of the box, and a scripting that does wonders with it. I love it. But as good as it is, it's quite limited in certain musical contexts. I would say, SM strings are, to some extent, quite the opposite: takes time to master, but the flexibility it offers is unparalleled. To quote Saxer here:
> 
> 
> 
> I resonated a lot with that, and I think what he said about SCS could also be said about CSS (or any other "traditional", good string library). I also see them (CSS and SM) working sinergetically to some extent. Can't confirm that yet, though.
> 
> 
> 
> Glad you liked it!
> 
> 
> 
> In a sense, trying to perform a piece of music organically out of different pre-recorded articulations is like trying to recreate a human being out of different body parts: if you work hard enough, know what you're doing, and, above all, avoid writing things that the library can't manage, you can get "the most beautiful Frankenstein" one could possibly dream of. Of course, absolutely nothing wrong with it, quite on the contrary, but the moment you want the monster to stretch... then it hurts.
> 
> Pure synthesis allows much more flexibility at the cost of timbral beauty, and elegance. It's like a constant struggle between sound & performance. I guess when it comes to VIs, in the search for "realism", we tend to focus much more on the sound ... but you give me the Lady Blunt Stradivarius and I will show you how "unreal" it can sound in the wrong hands. For me personally it's the other way around, but to sound neutral here, let's say performance is at least as important as timbre for musical expression and beauty.
> 
> Although sample based, SM works clearly differently from traditional libraries, allowing much more flexibility. I hope its hybrid approach could someday bridge the gap, and bring to the table the best of these two aspects. That's why I find libraries such as SM or Aaron's Infinite Series much more interesting to follow. But then I listen to Andy Blaney's BBC orchestral demo, and I relax from any dogmatism. Let every developer provide us with the best products they can come up with, and let'us suffer not being millionaires  I must be a little masochistic, cause I really enjoy each new release, even if I can't afford to purchase it.
> 
> I'm glad I got these strings. From the things I tried so far I could see me using it in 3 different contexts:
> 
> 1) As a NotePerformer "on steroids" (strings only) for the DAW. An example of this is the Sakamoto track I uploaded earlier in this thread. Load the midi file, blow your BC, and enjoy.
> 
> 2) As a layering lib to enrich the sound of other strings or hide their flaws.
> 
> 3) As a main library that provides better performance in more complex musical contexts (this Mozart divertimento could be an example)
> 
> Next I think I'll try something more lyrical. I'll post it if I can make it sound decent.



Super post. Given that I have such busy days these days (wtih the day job and the kids) unfortunately I'm not finding enough hours with the strings. I still have the First Contact mockup to do, and there's the middle section where you definitely have a need for that big 'filmic' sound which I'm hoping these strings will be able to do. Those are the kind of lines where the more traditional libraries manage to do relatively well. In fact, one of the best mockups (for anything) that I heard were using Hollywood Strings on that very piece. Anyways, soon as I have the chance, I'll post it.


----------



## philippe goi

Bought yesterday very satisfied! here is a short demonstration (small set, Tecontrol breath controller and vienna mir pro for spacialization).


----------



## Jonathan Moray

philippe goi said:


> Bought yesterday very satisfied! here is a short demonstration (small set, Tecontrol breath controller and vienna mir pro for spacialization).



How long did you spend on this? For only having it less than a day I would say that this is pretty good. I think MIR Pro does a decent job putting it in a hall.

One thing I can say is that there's a couple of nasty high frequencies. There one rouge freq at C#8 (Aprox: 4440Hz) that's really piercing. Doing a narrow / surgical cut there to tame it helps quite a lot. Be careful to not cut to much tought or it will sound like they are playing with mutes. I attached a file to show a before and after of my very quick fix. I also added a little bit of air to the strings.

Of course this is my opinion. Some might like that type of harshness.


----------



## philippe goi

Thanks for your version, I improvised in real time without worrying too much about mixing, just insert MIR PRO , it is obvious that a work of mixing will make the difference! now I have to spend time balancing these fabulous strings and discover all the possibilities of expressions


----------



## Jonathan Moray

philippe goi said:


> Thanks for your version, I improvised in real time without worrying too much about mixing, just insert MIR PRO , it is obvious that a work of mixing will make the difference! now I have to spend time balancing these fabulous strings and discover all the possibilities of expressions



I see. Then I can understand it sounding a bit rough around the edges. It sounds good for being just improv.

Please post more if you do anything else with the strings. It's really educational listening to all the user examples.


----------



## bun

Is it possible to route each player in the ensemble to a different output? That way they could be individually positioned in MIR, like Dimension Strings.


----------



## Jonathan Moray

bun said:


> Is it possible to route each player in the ensemble to a different output? That way they could be individually positioned in MIR, like Dimension Strings.



Yes and no. It's at least not possible from one patch. If you make a big ensemble from multiple smaller ensembles or solos then you can route each to it's own output. But if you use one patch to simulate the ensemble I believe there's no way to split each player to it's own output.


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

Jonathan Moray said:


> Yes and no. It's at least not possible from one patch. If you make a big ensemble from multiple smaller ensembles or solos then you can route each to it's own output. But if you use one patch to simulate the ensemble I believe there's no way to split each player to it's own output.



Exactly.


----------



## bun

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> Exactly.


Could it be made possible pretty please...?


----------



## Jonathan Moray

bun said:


> Could it be made possible pretty please...?



Most likely not. It's not only a limitation of the library but I believe it's also a limitation of kontakt. I don't think kontakt allows to route 15 different instruments from one patch. If I remember correctly I've heard devs talk about not being able to route more than X number of mics out of kontakt at the same time to different outputs.

Furthermore; I think I read that SM Strings simulates players, it's not actual physical players. So if you have an ensemble size of 15 players it's not actually 15 different voices. Which makes it impossible to route each player since they don't exist.


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

bun said:


> Could it be made possible pretty please...?



I'm afraid this wouldn't work.


----------



## bun

Oh... so it's because it's not just layered voices... makes sense.


----------



## Batrawi

still not convinced with the sound in the slightest. I'm tempted though given the playability and supposedly the endless tweakable parameters which I assume may get me close to the sound I'm after (am I fooling myself?)

could anyone post an example (one for violins one for cellos if possible) of these strings in their most raw/gritty/aggressive/dry state?
I'm trying to make up my mind...


----------



## Fa

bun said:


> Is it possible to route each player in the ensemble to a different output? That way they could be individually positioned in MIR, like Dimension Strings.



As Giorgio say, and you realized, the modules are acoustic component of the full section sound, not independent players. During beta-testing I did some experiments by the way  

It was my curiosity to compare the early reflections and positioning of the Kontakt vs. my experiments in MIR. The result wasn't improving the sound, the opposite, disconnecting the sound component was creating an overall sound deterioration.

What is very effective instead, is using MIR to mix and position A and B divisi + first chair: a bit consuming from resource point of view (e.g. Violins I made out of 2 multis and a solo, is 9 modules instead of 4, so more than double load), but rewarding from positioning in the hall point of view.

Using MIR, I discovered that it's better to reduce the Kontakt SM Strings early reflections, and let the MIR ambisonic do the rest of the job.


----------



## Don Cajon

Anybody else noticed those issues with the pizzicato articulation I previously described here? 


Don Cajon said:


> However, as @Giorgio Tommasini is watching this thread, I have some feedback already that I wish SM to consider for the next update. To this post attached are two files. "SM Pizzicato Bugs - MoreVariationsPlease" is a simplistic rendering of some pizzicato notes on a g and a c# played on the solo cello. It sounds like the instrument uses just a single pizzicato sample per note without any variations. It seems to me there are 3-4 dynamic layers in use, but within each dynamic layer a different velocity just leads to a different volume of the same sample. This makes the sound of multiple pizzicati in a row quite machine gun like to me. I think this would greatly benefit from adding variation samples!
> 
> Also attached is the "SM Pizzicato Bugs - StrangeSustains", again the solo cello playing pizzicato. This time I'm striking with an increasingly higher velocity each keystroke. What I hear is that the first g in the range of velocity 90, the c# starting with velocity 50 and the last g in the range of velocity 90 sound more like a bad piano than cello pizzicato. This seems to come from a kind of sustain layer fading in too strong - at least that is how it sounds to me. I guess this needs more subtle adjustment? Also irritating with the last g repetitions is how playing the lowest velocity the pizzicato is quite rich of high frequencies, around velocity 50 these high frequencies vanish suddenly and around velocity 90 the high frequencies are back.
> 
> Normally, SM instruments are extremely good at transitioning from one point to another (for instance ppp to fff or non-vibrato to vibrato). To me, the pizzicatos are not at the level I'd expect from them.
> 
> The slapped pizzicato of the solo cellos g in the file "SM Pizzicato Bugs - StrangeSustains" sounds like a g# instead of a g. I guess this is just a sample placed at the wrong key?






Fa said:


> It was my curiosity to compare the early reflections and positioning of the Kontakt vs. my experiments in MIR. The result wasn't improving the sound, the opposite, disconnecting the sound component was creating an overall sound deterioration.
> [...]
> Using MIR, I discovered that it's better to reduce the Kontakt SM Strings early reflections, and let the MIR ambisonic do the rest of the job.


Exactly, and that is also my experience from similar experiments with previous Samplemodeling libraries. The reason is because you are mixing/blurring the spatial information of two acoustic spaces.
Though I do not fully understand the process of how Samplemodeling created the ER IRs.



Fa said:


> What is very effective instead, is using MIR to mix and position A and B divisi + first chair: a bit consuming from resource point of view (e.g. Violins I made out of 2 multis and a solo, is 9 modules instead of 4, so more than double load), but rewarding from positioning in the hall point of view.



What CPU do you have, what buffer size can you run with that and how much processing power is left with this approach used for all the ensemble strings?


----------



## I like music

servandus said:


> I resonated a lot with that, and I think what he said about SCS could also be said about CSS (or any other "traditional", good string library). I also see them (CSS and SM) working sinergetically to some extent. Can't confirm that yet, though.



Would love to hear your thoughts on this. I have CSS and also wondered if layering these would provide a good result in different circumstances.


----------



## Erik

Hi,

Here is my version of (the Eternal Return here of) _Schindler's List_, this time in a version for (SamMod) violin and (OT) harp (why not?). In many ways this one differs quite a lot from the one that has been posted earlier.

I hope you'll enjoy. Never came so close with any other violin VI than with the Sample Modeling one.

[EDIT: see post no.438]


----------



## I like music

Erik said:


> Hi,
> 
> Here is my version of (the Eternal Return here of) _Schindler's List_, this time in a version for (SamMod) violin and (OT) harp (why not?). In many ways this one differs quite a lot from the one that has been posted earlier.
> 
> I hope you'll enjoy. Never came so close with any other violin VI than with the Sample Modeling one.



Amazing. The fact that we both can use the exact same VI and create two diff performances is what makes it amazing. I like yours better, due to the tempo management (I think I went to extremes) + I'm really interested in how you managed to make some of those transitions buttery soft, as they slide. Is there possibly a chance you could share a MIDI of this with me so that I can compare please, especially what you did in a few of those bits?


----------



## Erik

But of course, just PM me and you'll get the midi or Cubase10 file.


----------



## Batrawi

Erik said:


> Hi,
> 
> Here is my version of (the Eternal Return here of) _Schindler's List_, this time in a version for (SamMod) violin and (OT) harp (why not?). In many ways this one differs quite a lot from the one that has been posted earlier.
> 
> I hope you'll enjoy. Never came so close with any other violin VI than with the Sample Modeling one.


sounds good performance-wise...
tone-wise though it's as if played inside a cola can (boxy and metallic). reminds me to be very careful with the type of convo/algo ambiences when applied to such modelled instruments. curious what you've used here and if you can substitute it with a more absorbant/woody virtual room if that would improve the tone


----------



## servandus

I like music said:


> Would love to hear your thoughts on this. I have CSS and also wondered if layering these would provide a good result in different circumstances.



I'm right now in "jerk mode" (september examinations; I teach in a conservatory; I've done terrible things in previous lives, so it's deserved). If you say a little prayer for me, I'll post some comparison during this week when time allows. 

I haven't tried it actually, but my impression is that SM can be made to sound similar to CSS to some extent (although I guess it's difficult-to-impossible to beat CSS's beautiful tone color), so it could not only be useful for layering, but for complementing each other. I'll try to post something asap.


----------



## I like music

servandus said:


> I'm right now in "jerk mode" (september examinations; I teach in a conservatory; I've done terrible things in previous lives, so it's deserved). If you say a little prayer for me, I'll post some comparison during this week when time allows.
> 
> I haven't tried it actually, but my impression is that SM can be made to sound similar to CSS to some extent (although I guess it's difficult-to-impossible to beat CSS's beautiful tone color), so it could not only be useful for layering, but for complementing each other. I'll try to post something asap.



Funny you should mention it, because even though I'm a total amateur, once I placed them in the 'same' hall and added a bit more reverb to SM strings, they sounded _quite_ similar to CSS. However, CSS has this additional magical quality which sets it apart (tone-wise, whether you like it or not) but yes, they'll both complement each other quite a bit. Although, I don't know if they'll improve the sound if they are both providing a similar darker tone? I guess it might be easier to brighten SM strings if you want more variety in the pallette.

Good luck (to your students) in the exams!


----------



## servandus

Batrawi said:


> could anyone post an example (one for violins one for cellos if possible) of these strings in their most raw/gritty/aggressive/dry state?
> I'm trying to make up my mind...



Hi, Batrawi, did you listen to the cello excerpt I uploaded earlier in this thread?



https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/smcello-mp3.22000/



It has some small room ambience in it, but I guess you can judge from it if it's gritty enough for your taste/purposes. I can't make it sound more aggressive without sounding unrealistic, imo.

As I said, I'm short of time, but if I have a chance, I'll do something aggressive in a musical context (no promise though)


----------



## servandus

I like music said:


> Although, I don't know if they'll improve the sound if they are both providing a similar darker tone? I guess it might be easier to brighten SM strings if you want more variety in the pallette.



Yes, those are exactly my impressions also. That's why I say that I think they can be made to work sinergetically, complementing each other. In the layering scenario, I can also imagine how a brighter SM IR could add some highs to the dark soul of CSS.



I like music said:


> Good luck (to your students) in the exams!



Thanks!! Some of them are really going to need it 😂


----------



## I like music

servandus said:


> Yes, those are exactly my impressions also. That's why I say that I think they can be made to work sinergetically, complementing each other. In the layering scenario, I can also imagine how a brighter SM IR could add some highs to the dark soul of CSS.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks!! Some of them are really going to need it 😂



Because instead of teaching them, you've been telling them all year about layering two different string libraries?


----------



## Fa

Erik said:


> Hi,
> 
> Here is my version of (the Eternal Return here of) _Schindler's List_, this time in a version for (SamMod) violin and (OT) harp (why not?). In many ways this one differs quite a lot from the one that has been posted earlier.
> 
> I hope you'll enjoy. Never came so close with any other violin VI than with the Sample Modeling one.



Interesting. Still I like the version shared by @I like music more than this one. @Erik I think you realized an excellent phrasing, but I can't find realistic or attractive the sound and the ambience (due to some constant dark and metallic resonance, more evident in some higher notes): what effect chain did you use, Kontakt/SM or an external one?


----------



## philippe goi

New small demonstration , small ensemble , virtual sound stage ( decca) and altiverb ( todd preset) , long notes and fast .


----------



## Jonathan Moray

philippe goi said:


> New small demonstration , small ensemble , virtual sound stage ( decca) and altiverb ( todd preset) , long notes and fast .



Nicely done. I think it sounds pretty good overall. There's a few things I like different with my strings, but that might just be personal preference. I would also say it's rather expressive.

How many CCs did you use to sculpt this? And are you maxing out the vibrato anywhere in this piece?


----------



## germancomponist

Erik said:


> Hi,
> 
> Here is my version of (the Eternal Return here of) _Schindler's List_, this time in a version for (SamMod) violin and (OT) harp (why not?). In many ways this one differs quite a lot from the one that has been posted earlier.
> 
> I hope you'll enjoy. Never came so close with any other violin VI than with the Sample Modeling one.


What reverb did u use here?


----------



## Batrawi

philippe goi said:


> New small demonstration , small ensemble , virtual sound stage ( decca) and altiverb ( todd preset) , long notes and fast .


Yeah! more of this please (if you can)... using same example but just going tighter/drier with the virtual ambiance


----------



## I like music

I wrote something and did it with both the larger and the smaller ensembles. What I was really impressed with was the increased detail in things like vibrato etc on as the ensembles got smaller. I feel like layering (within SM itself) could lead to excellent results. Another exciting avenue to ponder.


----------



## servandus

I shouldn't be doing this today. In front of me a pile of harmony exams is looking at me, smiling, like saying "you know you're not going to sleep tonight, don't you?"




Quick example of SM (dominant) layered with CSS. Inmediate benefits:

1) CSS helps taming the somewhat nasal character of the low register of SM, and improves the overall tone

2) Vibrato and legato transitions get slightly decoupled due to the different nature of both libraries, contributing to the overall tone, and increasing realism (at least for me)

3) Multiple choice of timbres thanks to the various IRs, sizes, timbral possibilites, etc. that SM offers (I like the tone I'm getting here, but I've tried many others equally satisfying, though very different in character)

4) The most important aspect for me personally: flexibility and performance control. SM makes it a pleasure to control bowing and dynamics. It responds so fast and precisely, that CSS seems akward in comparison. It definitely allows me to do things I could not get out of CSS alone. For that reason, I find it necessary to give SM a dominant role in the layering.

Having said that, I've never really been a fan of layering. But now I think SM is bringing new possibilities to the table in this respect, and I definitely should spend more time with this, because I find that the results are even better than I expected. Still a lot of things to try...

Now back to the augmented sixths... 😕


----------



## DANIELE

I like music said:


> I wrote something and did it with both the larger and the smaller ensembles. *What I was really impressed with was the increased detail in things like vibrato etc on as the ensembles got smaller*. I feel like layering (within SM itself) could lead to excellent results. Another exciting avenue to ponder.



Yeah, it was one of the first things I checked, and I was not disappointed, truly great details.


----------



## David Cuny

After much hand wringing, I finally pulled the lever on this.

I'm mostly interested in using the SM solo instruments in a live setting with my EWI. I currently have all the SWAM strings (except for the bass).

Out of the box, the SM strings play nicely through the EWI, and sound very good.

Not I surprise, I know. 

The SM solo instruments are more "real" than the SWAM instruments. They have a midrange that the SWAM instruments lack - more "body" to the instrument. In comparison, the SWAM instruments sound like they're "all string", if that makes sense.

I'm still working my way through the SM interface, so I haven't figured out how to get the expression control to drive the parameters yet. Time to RTFM.

A couple of minor nits:

The "Wind Controller" option doesn't work with my USB EWI, but the "Breath Controller" does. This is the same issue as the SM Trumpet.
The double bass has an issue with the 'A' note in the second-to-lowest register - it sounds like it's missing the lower harmonics.
On the EWI, the SM strings sound an octave higher than the SWAM strings. I haven't bothered to check which is right, but the SWAM strings are easier to play on the EWI. Yeah, I could just figure out how to change that in Kontakt.


----------



## I like music

servandus said:


> I shouldn't be doing this today. In front of me a pile of harmony exams is looking at me, smiling, like saying "you know you're not going to sleep tonight, don't you?"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quick example of SM (dominant) layered with CSS. Inmediate benefits:
> 
> 1) CSS helps taming the somewhat nasal character of the low register of SM, and improves the overall tone
> 
> 2) Vibrato and legato transitions get slightly decoupled due to the different nature of both libraries, contributing to the overall tone, and increasing realism (at least for me)
> 
> 3) Multiple choice of timbres thanks to the various IRs, sizes, timbral possibilites, etc. that SM offers (I like the tone I'm getting here, but I've tried many others equally satisfying, though very different in character)
> 
> 4) The most important aspect for me personally: flexibility and performance control. SM makes it a pleasure to control bowing and dynamics. It responds so fast and precisely, that CSS seems akward in comparison. It definitely allows me to do things I could not get out of CSS alone. For that reason, I find it necessary to give SM a dominant role in the layering.
> 
> Having said that, I've never really been a fan of layering. But now I think SM is bringing new possibilities to the table in this respect, and I definitely should spend more time with this, because I find that the results are even better than I expected. Still a lot of things to try...
> 
> Now back to the augmented sixths... 😕




Oh, I _do_ like this!!! Would you mind my asking how you give one library a more dominant role? Is it simply a case of controlling relative volumes? So that CSS doesn't poke out so much from underneath? I guess the _only_ time you wouldn't be layering is when you need lines with less or no vibrato, since CSS's is so heavily baked in.


----------



## Erik

Hi,

Apparently something went wrong somewhere in the Schindler's List#1. Indeed it sounds strange and sort of hollow, how could I have missed this on my headphones. It was *not *due to the final reverb added (just _Fabfilter_) btw. Fabio and others with complaints about the sound: you were right.

To make things up I have made a new version (#3), just *plain *except for reverb as mentioned. So no other plugins added, just instrument 4.

As a small bonus I there a version (#4) with a somewhat warmer final sound by an automated EZQ (Toneboosters), because for my ears some higher or longer notes can sound a bit harsh sometimes and I can't get rid of those within the SM-violin itself. So sorry Fabio, maybe you do agree?

I will check better before uploading also on my speakers, with these versions I hope to have done more justice to this wonderful product imo.

There is a question about stage positioning however: how do I get two instrument 'in the same room', I mean, is is dangerous to use MIR for the strings as I have understood. Will SPAT do the job better (reverb disabled then). Fabio, could you help me out here?

OK, let's go again.


----------



## Jonathan Moray

Erik said:


> Hi,
> 
> Apparently something went wrong somewhere in the Schindler's List#1. Indeed it sounds strange and sort of hollow, how could I have missed this on my headphones. It was *not *due to the final reverb added (just _Fabfilter_) btw. Fabio and others with complaints about the sound: you were right.
> 
> To make things up I have made a new version (#3), just *plain *except for reverb as mentioned. So no other plugins added, just instrument 4.
> 
> As a small bonus I there a version (#4) with a somewhat warmer final sound by an automated EZQ (Toneboosters), because for my ears some higher or longer notes can sound a bit harsh sometimes and I can't get rid of those within the SM-violin itself. So sorry Fabio, maybe you do agree?
> 
> I will check better before uploading also on my speakers, with these versions I hope to have done more justice to this wonderful product imo.
> 
> There is a question about stage positioning however: how do I get two instrument 'in the same room', I mean, is is dangerous to use MIR for the strings as I have understood. Will SPAT do the job better (reverb disabled then). Fabio, could you help me out here?
> 
> OK, let's go again.



Sounds much better! Very expressive.

What do you mean "dangerous to use MIR"? I don't own it so cant say anything, I'm just curious.


----------



## Fa

Erik said:


> Apparently something went wrong somewhere in the Schindler's List#1. Indeed it sounds strange and sort of hollow, how could I have missed this on my headphones. It was *not *due to the final reverb added (just _Fabfilter_) btw. Fabio and others with complaints about the sound: you were right.
> 
> To make things up I have made a new version (#3), just *plain *except for reverb as mentioned. So no other plugins added, just instrument 4.
> 
> As a small bonus I there a version (#4) with a somewhat warmer final sound by an automated EZQ (Toneboosters), because for my ears some higher or longer notes can sound a bit harsh sometimes and I can't get rid of those within the SM-violin itself. So sorry Fabio, maybe you do agree?



Yes, this versions sound much better, and I like them both. Very nice job. I really like the warmer version, very good processing indeed.



Erik said:


> I will check better before uploading also on my speakers, with these versions I hope to have done more justice to this wonderful product imo.
> 
> There is a question about stage positioning however: how do I get two instrument 'in the same room', I mean, is is dangerous to use MIR for the strings as I have understood. Will SPAT do the job better (reverb disabled then). Fabio, could you help me out here?



Giorgio did several tests with SPAT, and I did a lot of tests with MIR (and VSS2 also): I don't agree with the MIR detractors, and I use MIR as my main mixing and spatialization platform, but we had some interesting findings experimenting with both SPAT and MIR.

MIR, even if it has a very simple, nice and user-friendly interface, is a complex tool and need a bit of experience and understanding to provide best results, in particular with 3rd party sound sources out of the VSL VI collection. But SPAT as well... what they have in common is working with ambisonic algorithms, sometime creating artifacts with the early reflection and stereo image embedded in external samples. That's why it's often easier and better sounding a pretty dry&close sound-source to be processed in MIR.

Due to the fact SM Strings provide you with the option of disabling the reverb (in the reverb page of solos, or in the sends out of ensembles) but also of modulating or even disable the Early Reflections (in the virtual stage page) they sound perfect in MIR:
- the best and clean positioning and ambience for solos is obtained following Andi's (from VSL MIR team) recommendations, then use a mono instance, with mono IR, with disabled ER, and with MIR width =0 (like the single players of VSL Dimension strings). Then you can play with wet/dry balance to find your favorite amount of reverb.

- due to the fact the internal ER of SM strings add a nice organic resonance to the solo instruments, and are important for the ensemble instruments size and stereo imaging, then I still got very good results in MIR with just a lower amount of internal ER (e.g. 0 to 40, instead of the default 80 to 100) compensated by a lower amount of MIR wet/dry balance (e.g. 30 to 40, instead of the default 50).

The image you get out of this process is still stereophonic and deep, because the ambisonic engine of MIR build-up the right early and secondary reflections.

I suppose you may do something similar with SPAT but I'm not an expert: what I can say is that misuse of SPAT produced pretty "boxed" sound and misuse of MIR produced reverb mismatch (kind of metallic sound) and/or spectrum alterations (due to the pretty distinctive colour of the MIR venues). What is nice with MIR is you may compensate all of that using the internal room eQ presets, and the proper chain, as explained above.

I did some experiment with Vistual Sound Stage 2 + algorithmic reverb, and it also works well (again the perfect match between the VSS2 ER and the final reverb is not trivial and need a bit of experience and experiments to be fine tuned, before it gives you the best result).


----------



## Fa

servandus said:


> I shouldn't be doing this today. In front of me a pile of harmony exams is looking at me, smiling, like saying "you know you're not going to sleep tonight, don't you?"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quick example of SM (dominant) layered with CSS. Inmediate benefits:
> 
> 1) CSS helps taming the somewhat nasal character of the low register of SM, and improves the overall tone
> 
> 2) Vibrato and legato transitions get slightly decoupled due to the different nature of both libraries, contributing to the overall tone, and increasing realism (at least for me)
> 
> 3) Multiple choice of timbres thanks to the various IRs, sizes, timbral possibilites, etc. that SM offers (I like the tone I'm getting here, but I've tried many others equally satisfying, though very different in character)
> 
> 4) The most important aspect for me personally: flexibility and performance control. SM makes it a pleasure to control bowing and dynamics. It responds so fast and precisely, that CSS seems akward in comparison. It definitely allows me to do things I could not get out of CSS alone. For that reason, I find it necessary to give SM a dominant role in the layering.
> 
> Having said that, I've never really been a fan of layering. But now I think SM is bringing new possibilities to the table in this respect, and I definitely should spend more time with this, because I find that the results are even better than I expected. Still a lot of things to try...
> 
> Now back to the augmented sixths... 😕




I totally agree. From day 1 of beta testing, and from day 1 of overall public discussion this is my main argument: this library offers a new set of tools, that was NOT YET available before, opening to an almost infinite number of new scenarios of use blending or stand alone. I used it with VSL Dimension strings, and the 2 libraries complement each other filling the limitations and gaps of both, for an outstanding final result. (e.g. VSL offers the organic crispy tone to the large ensemble sound of SM, being sometime too silky, while SM Strings offer the continuous variation, covering the artificial and often cold/mechanic connections of VSL articulations, etc.)


----------



## Peter Siedlaczek

Hi David,

you write that the wind controller option "does not work"... How do you mean that? What happens if you activate the Wind Controller mode and play? If you believe that this is something related to your instrument setup, please do not hesitate to contact our support, since other wind controller users confirmed the playability "out of the box" without any problems.

Concerning the pitch vs. octave question - I don´t know why the SWAM strings sound different, but I can ensure you that the pitch of our instruments corresponds exactly to the MIDI note number. That means: if you play middle C, you will hear middle C (I mean the MIDI note number 60, whis is "C3" (Yamaha), or "C4" (Rolland)). Not the C one octave higher or lower... The exception are the basses which are transposing instruments, playing 1 octave lower, so sending the MIDI note 60 will play C below the middle C. If, however, you have your own preferences, please use the Transposition menu inside the instrument(s). *Do not use* the general Kontakt transposition, because it may lead to unwanted side effects (for that reason we were always using our "own" transposition knob which transposes also the Keyswitches).

As to the timbre of the "A" - I assume you mean the "A" which is one octave above the lowest playable A, correct? Well, I wouldn´t call it "an issue"; it´s the "truth"...  We are not using synthetic sounds, but recorded samples. There is *no resonating body* in the real, acoustic world, which is resonating with the same intensity at any frequency. And indeed - when you measure the levels of the fundamental frequencies across the scale of any string instrument, they all will always vary. In this case, A1 has a less boosted fundamental than the other notes in that range. Having very similar spectra at different pitches would lead to a much more sterile sound. BTW, the proof that this is related to the instrument body is the fact that this phenomenon is present regardless the dynamics you play (which are different samples), and even playing the same note on another string (keyswitch A#) yields similar difference in sound. It´s simply the way the instrument body resonates at that pitch. Of course in the ensemble you will not experience it, because several - slightly different - instruments blend together, yielding more "averaged" results. As it is in the real life .

With best wishes

Peter


----------



## David Cuny

Peter Siedlaczek said:


> you write that the wind controller option "does not work"... How do you mean that?


Hi, Peter.

Sorry, I should have been more specific. By "does not work", I meant "does not work the way I expected."

Specifically, each legato note is connected with a cartoonishly slow portamento.

Being too lazy to dig through the manual and figure out why the "out of the box" settings didn't work well, I switched to the breath controller option, which doesn't have this behavior.

Digging deeper, I see that in *Wind Controller* mode, the *Velocity *of* Portamento Time* is set to 0%. Changing this higher value corrects the issue.

In contrast, in *Breath Controller* mode, the default *Velocity* of *Portamento Time* is 100%.




Peter Siedlaczek said:


> Concerning the pitch vs. octave question - I don´t know why the SWAM strings sound different, but I can ensure you that the pitch of our instruments corresponds exactly to the MIDI note number.






> If, however, you have your own preferences, please use the Transposition menu inside the instrument(s).


Thanks. I didn't mean to say it was wrong, just it was (inconveniently) different. Thanks for the tip!



Peter Siedlaczek said:


> As to the timbre of the "A" - I assume you mean the "A" which is one octave above the lowest playable A, correct?


Correct.



Peter Siedlaczek said:


> Well, I wouldn´t call it "an issue"; it´s the "truth"...


Thanks for the clarification. I will confess, the double-bass is the one string instrument I don't have any practical experience with. The rest I can play with a amazing lack of skill! .

Thanks again, and congratulations!


----------



## Andrew Souter

A Quick test :



https://2caudio.com/sitecontent/products/precedence/community/TorstenKamps-LittleMagicFlower-SamplemodelingSoloStrings-2CAudio.wav



I used the MIDI files from one of the existing demo songs and rerendered it. The demo seems to use the ensemble patches together with a 3rd party harp part. Here I used the solo instruments, one each for the five part string harmony. I did not edit the MIDI performance at all. I'm in love with Torsten's composition here!

"Virtual Stage" and Reverb/ER IRs are disabled in the Kontact instruments to make the instruments as dry as possible. Spatialization, placement, depth, and reverb is handled completely by Precedence and Breeze. One instance of Precedence and Breeze on each track, 5 total of each.

DMG Audio provides light compression and limiting on the master. That's it.

The simple mix looks like this:

https://2caudio.com/sitecontent/pro...y/Samplemodeling_2CAudio_SimpleMixExample.png






Really impressive instruments! The playability is excellent! Can't wait to explore more!


----------



## DANIELE

I didn't know about Precedence, since I already have B2 Reverb I'm asking: do the two plugins "talk" to each other?

Since VSS2 doesn't have an embedded reverb I'm looking to a similar plugin that has everything inside. SPAT is to complex and require an "out of mind" routing (at least with Reaper) plus using external applications plus it is too expensive. MIR PRO is in the middle but it is still costly and I have to study how it works if I want to use it directly in Reaper (because VEP actually doesn't work how I want in it and I have put it apart).

So, from what I see, precedence doesn't have embedded reverb too but works well with 2Ca reverb. Do they has some options to configure them together or do I have to works on them separately aswell. Could I embed B2 in precedence?


----------



## Erik

Fabio,
Thanks for your explanation about MIR and SPAT, I will follow your suggestions and experiment with them. Seems very interesting to me.


----------



## Andrew Souter

DANIELE said:


> I didn't know about Precedence, since I already have B2 Reverb I'm asking: do the two plugins "talk" to each other?
> 
> Since VSS2 doesn't have an embedded reverb I'm looking to a similar plugin that has everything inside. SPAT is to complex and require an "out of mind" routing (at least with Reaper) plus using external applications plus it is too expensive. MIR PRO is in the middle but it is still costly and I have to study how it works if I want to use it directly in Reaper (because VEP actually doesn't work how I want in it and I have put it apart).
> 
> So, from what I see, precedence doesn't have embedded reverb too but works well with 2Ca reverb. Do they has some options to configure them together or do I have to works on them separately aswell. Could I embed B2 in precedence?



Let's chat about Precedence and Breeze in the Precedence thread so we keep the focus on SM here, as you said in PM.

The important part to point out that libraries/instruments like SM and AM and other very dry libraries need both some form of positioning/imagining tool, AND a great verb to sound as good as possible IMHO. That could come from us or from MIR, or SPAT or whatever else, but verb alone is not quite enough in these cases. 

It should be noted that Precedence even effectively applies some degree of extra "humanization" to the direct sound as well as recreating various stereo microphone techniques. This seems to gel very very well with these kind of instruments. You can do entire peices this way, or you can blend them much better with wet libraries. But as dry as possible instruments with these kind of tools is the next evolution I think, like someone else hypothesized in another current thread. I agree!

The tone, responsiveness to velocity, CC contol, intelligent scripting, and general "playabilty" of SMS is really awesome! i.e. everything that defines the instrument is great! Feed it into a spatialization engine of your choice, and the synergy is next level!


----------



## DANIELE

Andrew Souter said:


> Let's chat about Precedence and Breeze in the Precedence thread so we keep the focus on SM here, as you said in PM.
> 
> The important part to point out that libraries/instruments like SM and AM and other very dry libraries need both some form of positioning/imagining tool, AND a great verb to sound as good as possible IMHO. That could come from us or from MIR, or SPAT or whatever else, but verb alone is not quite enough in these cases.
> 
> It should be noted that Precedence even effectively applies some degree of extra "humanization" to the direct sound as well as recreating various stereo microphone techniques. This seems to gel very very well with these kind of instruments. You can do entire peices this way, or you can blend them much better with wet libraries. But as dry as possible instruments with these kind of tools is the next evolution I think, like someone else hypothesized in another current thread. I agree!
> 
> The tone, responsiveness to velocity, CC contol, intelligent scripting, and general "playabilty" of SMS is really awesome! i.e. everything that defines the instrument is great! Feed it into a spatialization engine of your choice, and the synergy is next level!



Ok, I agree. Could you please answer to my main questions in the other thread? Or privately if you want.

Thank you.


----------



## Piano Pete

servandus said:


> I shouldn't be doing this today. In front of me a pile of harmony exams is looking at me, smiling, like saying "you know you're not going to sleep tonight, don't you?"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quick example of SM (dominant) layered with CSS. Inmediate benefits:
> 
> 1) CSS helps taming the somewhat nasal character of the low register of SM, and improves the overall tone
> 
> 2) Vibrato and legato transitions get slightly decoupled due to the different nature of both libraries, contributing to the overall tone, and increasing realism (at least for me)
> 
> 3) Multiple choice of timbres thanks to the various IRs, sizes, timbral possibilites, etc. that SM offers (I like the tone I'm getting here, but I've tried many others equally satisfying, though very different in character)
> 
> 4) The most important aspect for me personally: flexibility and performance control. SM makes it a pleasure to control bowing and dynamics. It responds so fast and precisely, that CSS seems akward in comparison. It definitely allows me to do things I could not get out of CSS alone. For that reason, I find it necessary to give SM a dominant role in the layering.
> 
> Having said that, I've never really been a fan of layering. But now I think SM is bringing new possibilities to the table in this respect, and I definitely should spend more time with this, because I find that the results are even better than I expected. Still a lot of things to try...
> 
> Now back to the augmented sixths... 😕




I hate to ask this while you are staring down a pile of exams that are, probably, sure to be chock-full of parallel motion, but if you--or anyone really-- find the time: would you do some quick comparison mockups of string runs using SM strings and something like CSS? I often find myself blending several libraries together in these instances, and I am wondering what SM would bring to the table in these cases.


----------



## Hanu_H

Andrew Souter said:


> A Quick test :
> 
> 
> 
> https://2caudio.com/sitecontent/products/precedence/community/TorstenKamps-LittleMagicFlower-SamplemodelingSoloStrings-2CAudio.wav
> 
> 
> 
> I used the MIDI files from one of the existing demo songs and rerendered it. The demo seems to use the ensemble patches together with a 3rd party harp part. Here I used the solo instruments, one each for the five part string harmony. I did not edit the MIDI performance at all. I'm in love with Torsten's composition here!
> 
> "Virtual Stage" and Reverb/ER IRs are disabled in the Kontact instruments to make the instruments as dry as possible. Spatialization, placement, depth, and reverb is handled completely by Precedence and Breeze. One instance of Precedence and Breeze on each track, 5 total of each.
> 
> DMG Audio provides light compression and limiting on the master. That's it.
> 
> The simple mix looks like this:
> 
> https://2caudio.com/sitecontent/pro...y/Samplemodeling_2CAudio_SimpleMixExample.png
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really impressive instruments! The playability is excellent! Can't wait to explore more!


This sounds absolutely stunning. There is just a few notes that sound a bit synthetic but the performance and the fluidity of the lines is just better than anything I've heard before. And this is when listening really critically and focusing on it, instead of just listening music. If this would be in a movie or just a song I would listen, I would think it's a live recording.


----------



## I like music

Hanu_H said:


> This sounds absolutely stunning. There is just a few notes that sound a bit synthetic but the performance and the fluidity of the lines is just better than anything I've heard before. And this is when listening really critically and focusing on it, instead of just listening music. If this would be in a movie or just a song I would listen, I would think it's a live recording.



I just saw the Beethoven's 5th thing that @leogardini posted in another thread - you should take a look if you haven't seen it. The fluidity (and to me the tone, as well) are amazing.


----------



## Andrew Souter

Hanu_H said:


> This sounds absolutely stunning. There is just a few notes that sound a bit synthetic but the performance and the fluidity of the lines is just better than anything I've heard before. And this is when listening really critically and focusing on it, instead of just listening music. If this would be in a movie or just a song I would listen, I would think it's a live recording.



Yes, that is my impression too. There are just a few notes that could be improved, otherwise it sounds quite "real".

I should emphasize that the MIDI parts I used were created for the Ensemble presets, not the solo strings. I simply sent the existing MIDI parts to the solo strings, disabled internal spatialization, applied the shown 2CAudio spatialization, and compressed the master a tiny bit. I did not edit the MIDI data at all, as this was my first time trying the instruments. I assume these few slightly less than perfect notes could be improved in the MIDI/CC performance if one were writing directly for the solo string instruments.


----------



## servandus

I like music said:


> Because instead of teaching them, you've been telling them all year about layering two different string libraries?



Because it's difficult to teach when my inner choir of demons starts singing "kill them, kill them...". I declare myself guilty of the charges.



I like music said:


> Oh, I do like this!!! Would you mind my asking how you give one library a more dominant role? Is it simply a case of controlling relative volumes? So that CSS doesn't poke out so much from underneath? I guess the only time you wouldn't be layering is when you need lines with less or no vibrato, since CSS's is so heavily baked in.



Yes, mainly volumen (fixed levels in the example), but also different mic. mixes/reverb settings, and panning/stereo-width/distance settings of course. I tried different things, but in that clip I used CSS default mix (no reverb) along with SM dry, default IR, disabled ERs -> VSL Hybrid Reverb (Teldex Near Preset, modified, after a pinch of VSL exciter (I still haven't messed around with the timbral shaping much), and before EQing some resonances). Btw, CSS can play non vib. also (CC2 by default, though crossfading vib. & non vib. samples doesn't really work most of the time)



David Cuny said:


> Digging deeper, I see that in Wind Controller mode, the Velocity of Portamento Time is set to 0%. Changing this higher value corrects the issue. In contrast, in Breath Controller mode, the default Velocity of Portamento Time is 100%.



Hi, David, if you prefer WC mode, you can still control the portamento time with CC5, which you can assign to other controllers available in your wind controller (bite, etc.). From the manual: _"WC mode automatically maps the Dynamics to CC2, and gives complete (100%) control of Portamento Time (see below) to CC5. In Keyboard mode, the duration of portamento is determined by the velocity of the overlapped note. Since note-on velocities output by WindControllers generally reflect the current CC2 value, portamento time becomes a function of the current dynamics. *This is undesirable, since, for example, playing pp will always lead to long portamento and vice versa.* Linking portamento time to a separate controller, such as CC5, permits to overcome this limitation. The duration of portamento can now be controlled with any suitable physical controller mapped to CC5."_



Piano Pete said:


> I hate to ask this while you are staring down a pile of exams that are, probably, sure to be chock-full of parallel motion, but if you--or anyone really-- find the time: would you do some quick comparison mockups of string runs using SM strings and something like CSS? I often find myself blending several libraries together in these instances, and I am wondering what SM would bring to the table in these cases.



No problem. String runs sound exciting in comparison with the work I have in my hands right now. I'll try to upload some example tonight when I come back, but in the meantime you could have a listen to the violins I in Sakamoto's Rain: 0:35

 

Fast, slurred passages are a joy to play with SM.



I like music said:


> The fluidity (and to me the tone, as well) are amazing.



It is indeed.


----------



## I like music

servandus said:


> Yes, mainly volumen (fixed levels in the example), but also different mic. mixes/reverb settings, and panning/stereo-width/distance settings of course. I tried different things, but in that clip I used CSS default mix (no reverb) along with SM dry, default IR, disabled ERs -> VSL Hybrid Reverb (Teldex Near Preset, modified, after a pinch of VSL exciter (I still haven't messed around with the timbral shaping much), and before EQing some resonances). Btw, CSS can play non vib. also (CC2 by default, though crossfading vib. & non vib. samples doesn't really work most of the time)



Thanks for the explanation! Just one thing I wasn't sure about. Did you put them both through the same reverb or did you mean that the default CSS mix was left as it was, and then you applied external verb to SM only?


----------



## servandus

I tried both, and it worked equally well. It just depends on what you're after. If you keep CSS as it is, without reverb, the quasi "close mic" effect is emphasized in relation with the fuller SM sound (I mean, even if you use the default mix in CSS, not the close mics). The clip I finally uploaded has the same Teldex reverb preset on the two signals, but completely different settings: SM gets generous ERs, and a rather spacious (though discreet) tail, while CSS has ERs muted, and just a subtler, narrower tail to "glue" the sound a bit.


----------



## AlexRuger

23 pages and I'm still not hearing anything that sounds remotely better than Garritan. 

I'm genuinely baffled that anyone can find anything to like in this library. It's *really* not good, as if it's wearing its fakeness as a badge of honor. I felt the same way about their old solo viola.

Which is strange, considering their brass is the best in the business.


----------



## Batrawi

AlexRuger said:


> 23 pages and I'm still not hearing anything that sounds remotely better than Garritan.
> 
> I'm genuinely baffled that anyone can find anything to like in this library. It's *really* not good, as if it's wearing its fakeness as a badge of honor. I felt the same way about their old solo viola.
> 
> Which is strange, considering their brass is the best in the business.


My personal conclusion is that it's the best for sketching & writing down ideas fast (and for that I may consider getting it) but in a final production, it won't sound better than any sample-based strings


----------



## Jonathan Moray

AlexRuger said:


> 23 pages and I'm still not hearing anything that sounds remotely better than Garritan.
> 
> I'm genuinely baffled that anyone can find anything to like in this library. It's *really* not good, as if it's wearing its fakeness as a badge of honor. I felt the same way about their old solo viola.
> 
> Which is strange, considering their brass is the best in the business.



Solo Viola? Are you thinking of Audio Modeling?

That depends on what you compare it to. For me playability and consistency is more important than sound. I agree it doesn't sound as good as most traditionally sampled libraries, but for me, it's close enough to where I can see myself making the switch. Aaron is also releasing a non-traditional approach to strings with his Infinite series so I'm holding out for that before getting anything new. 

I do hope this is the future, at least to some degree, and more developers will dip their toes in the modelling approach. The versatility it gives is undeniable.

It's still early days for SM Strings so as people get more comfortable and proficient with the library, as well as new updates coming out, I think the demos will get better as well. If I remember correctly it took a while for SM Brass to have someone make a demo that sounded good to me in an orchestral context.


----------



## AlexRuger

Jonathan Moray said:


> Solo Viola? Are you thinking of Audio Modeling?



Yup, my mistake.


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

AlexRuger said:


> 23 pages and I'm still not hearing anything that sounds remotely better than Garritan.
> 
> I'm genuinely baffled that anyone can find anything to like in this library. It's *really* not good, as if it's wearing its fakeness as a badge of honor. I felt the same way about their old solo viola.
> 
> Which is strange, considering their brass is the best in the business.



Hi Alex. As a developer, I should refrain from expressing personal opinions. However, when reading apodictic sentences like yours, namely: "I'm genuinely baffled that anyone can find anything to like in this library", my first thought is: "is this guy honest and objective?". My second thought is " how can he explain how others, well qualified musicians, share an opposite opinion?". My third thought is: "shouldn't this forum share a constructive attitude, i.e. "what's working and not working with a novel approach?". And finally, with this sentence, you assert that others' opinions are worthless. Not a very fair comment, if I may say.


----------



## AlexRuger

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> Hi Alex. As a developer, I should refrain from expressing personal opinions. However, when reading apodictic sentences like yours, namely: "I'm genuinely baffled that anyone can find anything to like in this library", my first thought is: "is this guy honest and objective?". My second thought is " how can he explain how others, well qualified musicians, share an opposite opinion?". My third thought is: "shouldn't this forum share a constructive attitude, i.e. "what's working and not working with a novel approach?". And finally, with this sentence, you assert that others' opinions are worthless. Not a very fair comment, if I may say.



Not entirely sure what you want me to say here.

Taking a quick look at your profile, it looks like you worked on this product. Sorry if I hurt your feelings, but the fact is that I'm hardly the first in this thread to express this opinion, and if you've worked with a string section, you'd know that this is not how one sounds. As others have said, it sounds more like a 90's rompler than a modern sample library. I'd amend that to say that it sits firmly in the uncanny valley of realism -- a 90's rompler's lack of realism is intense enough that it at least has its place.

So, yeah, "baffled" is a word I stand by. Sorry.

To answer your first question: yes, I'm pretty honest and objective. Perhaps too honest for your taste (not with the intent to harm, mind you), but definitely objective -- I'm pretty sure I have a good reputation on this forum for being experienced and knowledgable, and I'd like to hope that I'm known as kind as well (if at times short and pithy).

Regarding objectivity: you're ignoring the part where I said that Sample Modeling's brass is the best in the business. I literally sing its praises to everyone I know. "Need realistic brass? SM is the way to go, period." I have no agenda in terms of pushing one product or company or technology. Good is good, bad is bad, all of which is opinion of course (do we really need to keep saying that, though? Of course it is, that goes without saying).

I can explain your second question easily: loads of musicians here have zero experience with live ensembles (it's a forum that is first and foremost dedicated to virtual instruments, after all), care more about other aspects than the sound (see just a couple comments above), and maybe some just aren't actually "well-qualified." And like I said, I'm hardly the first person to say this on this thread.

Regarding your third question: I don't care what the approach is, novel or otherwise. I care about the results -- if it sounds good -- and this one does not. Considering that all string libraries made with this approach have sounded, to my ears, absolutely horrible, and that nearly all wind or brass libraries made with it have sounded wonderful, perhaps your technology is simply better-suited to the latter. Strings are tricky beasts to capture realism, and the old sample-based approach has produced great results thus far. Or maybe it's just too early to tell, and I'll eat my words in a few years. Who knows. I'm open to being proven wrong, but I don't particularly care how my awesome string library is producing its sound, beyond it sounding awesome. 

*shrug*

Sometimes things are bad. This is one of those times. No hard feelings, at least from this direction. Hope the product improves in the future.


----------



## Sam Reed

Alex,

If you were truly merely “baffled,” why post to the thread at all? Why not simply shrug, put it out of mind and move on to another activity? (Which, far as I’m concerned, is a sane response to most threads on Vi-C, or anywhere.)



AlexRuger said:


> Taking a quick look at your profile, it looks like you worked on this product



This kind of statement, taken side-by-side with other stuff you wrote, just doesn’t add up. Even a quick glance at Giorgio’s credentials will tell you that he didn’t merely “work on” this project — he co-created it; he invented it. As someone who sings the praises of samplemodeling brass, another in a long line of Peter & Giorgio's inventions which has been on the market for years, it’s even more incredible to think you could have simply missed this fact? Easily-avoidable oversights like this, combined with your other statements, give the uncomfortable impression that you’re just here to stir the pot?



AlexRuger said:


> Sorry if I hurt your feelings



I doubt any feelings were hurt. He merely said that the way in which you chose to express your opinions came across as disrespectful toward a large proportion of the thread's contributors. For me, the greater disappointment came in your second post, which seemed to demonstrate that this wasn't unintentional.



AlexRuger said:


> I can explain your second question easily: loads of musicians here have zero experience with live ensembles (it's a forum that is first and foremost dedicated to virtual instruments, after all), care more about other aspects than the sound (see just a couple comments above), and maybe some just aren't actually "well-qualified.”



Okay, maybe this is your opinion of most members of the Vi-C _forum ..._ but what makes you think this holds true for the average contributor to _this_ particular thread? Even at a glance, there’s not-insubstantial evidence to the contrary — yet you make no mention of this, did you just skim the thread?

One example among several others — Servando Valero is enthusiastically experimenting with this library, and he's the opposite of the picture you paint on every point:

1) He has day-to-day contact with live ensembles, as well as years of direct physical contact playing a real violin (made out of wood!)
2) As demonstrated in his posts experimenting to get more "bite," he clearly cares about the sound almost as much as the playability
3) He is clearly “well-qualified,” in that he can for example play Rózsa's violin concerto, from memory, on a real violin

Or did you mean “well-qualified” to specifically refer to facility with virtual instruments and audio engineering? But that can't be right, because that would undermine your argument that the library itself is “bad,” because how could that conclusion logically follow if all the examples you've heard were the work of neophytes?



AlexRuger said:


> I'm pretty sure I have a good reputation on this forum for being experienced and knowledgable, and I'd like to hope that I'm known as kind as well



I don’t know you from adam; your face looks vaguely familiar so I’ve probably read one of your posts months ago, but I don't recall anything about it. I don't know your reputation, but the things quoted above don't strike me as embodying the qualities you strive for.



AlexRuger said:


> Considering that all string libraries made with this approach have sounded, to my ears, absolutely horrible, and that nearly all wind or brass libraries made with it have sounded wonderful, perhaps your technology is simply better-suited to the latter. {...} Strings are tricky beasts to capture realism, and the old sample-based approach has produced great results thus far.



Personally I’ve never heard a woodwind product made with this approach I thought sounded “wonderful.” Everything I’ve heard so far from modeled woodwinds gives me a weird visceral reaction, a queasy kind of seasickness. But, so what -- what's to be gained questioning the musical chops of people who incorporate them into their workflow?

Samples themselves are great in some hands; in other hands they're “absolutely horrible.” The same could be said even for a Stradivarius — put it in the hands of an average, non-prodigy 4-year-old who’s never touched an instrument, and for years it will sound bad ... but to draw conclusions about the technology itself from such observations? I don't know man, seems like quite a leap.



AlexRuger said:


> No hard feelings, at least from this direction.



None from this direction either, just hoping to open your eyes a little. (Sincerely! If I were to have hard feelings toward a stranger on the internet, I personally just wouldn’t even engage them in conversation.)

Best,
Sam


⚠📯Now for a tangent not aimed at Alex, because this



AlexRuger said:


> Good is good, bad is bad, all of which is opinion of course (do we really need to keep saying that, though?



triggers a pet peeve of mine:

Uh, _yeah_ –– we (humans) _do_ need to keep saying that. Opinions stated as if they were objective facts are the purview of politicians, shock-jocks, and other idiots. They don’t win any reputation points with people who value intellectual rigor, interpersonal maturity and well-differentiated psychology. (But we're in the habit of doing it because it packs a rhetorical punch, right? Take for example, the opinions expressed as fact in this paragraph.)

“I don’t like X” and “I really like Y” are opinions, expressions of subjective taste. “X is bad” and “Y is good” are too often used in everyday speech as euphemisms for “I don’t like” and “I like” -- and the danger comes when we don't keep in mind that they're euphemisms.

But in many cases “good” and “bad” -- when used in a neutral sense without connotations attached (and obviously not in the sense of “good vs. evil” & other nonsense) -- can be measured and evaluated fairly objectively, based on criteria a majority of diverse individuals agree upon, after healthy discussion to identify variables and define the characteristics of the desired end result.

For instance, the defining characteristics of "good" acoustic spaces are universally agreed upon by experts and non-experts alike, as has been demonstrated by ~100 years of research experiments which include data gathered from average listeners — such that we can now quantify variables such as room purpose, size & shape, and publish detailed guidelines (early-decay-time as related to RT60 of mid-range frequencies, width between side walls as related to ceiling height, etc. etc.) for constructing classrooms that won't render the teacher’s speech unintelligible, etc.

If for music someone prefers the sound of Walt Disney Concert Hall over the Berlin Philharmonie (or vice versa), that's subjective. But they're both “good halls” — objectively good.


p.s. Edited, believe it or not, to reduce length/enhance clarity (!)


----------



## TomaeusD

AlexRuger said:


> 23 pages and I'm still not hearing anything that sounds remotely better than Garritan.


Just to be sure, are we thinking about the same Garritan strings as in this video?


----------



## givemenoughrope

I thought the idea with SM/AM is that they sacrifice a bit of sound/tone for the ability to play the instrument much more expressively than regular sample libraries.


----------



## Batrawi

I'm completely baffled that some people are now starting to get baffled by someone who's baffled by other people's opinion! 

This is ultimately his own personal opinion and he has the ultimate freedom to express it! 

Now people seriously do have the energy to translate this as an "agenda" and starting to create bs theories around it - seriously?!!

I for one still can't unhear some synthyness in the sound of this library yet I may still find usability in its great expressivness.. so what's wrong with my first half of opinion? what's wrong with the other? 

These are just opinions people so just move on with it.... jeez....!


----------



## Fa

Batrawi said:


> My personal conclusion is that it's the best for sketching & writing down ideas fast (and for that I may consider getting it) but in a final production, it won't sound better than any sample-based strings



If you will finally get it, you will be surprised by your change of mind. The discussion was focusing on ensemble for instance, that still has the power of improving whatever professional production merging and fixing the limits of other "better sounding for your purpose" library, if not stand alone. But the really outstanding and unique component is the set of solos. Nothing on the market, in my humble opinion, can get close to them for the mix of sound and flexibility (a part for real players of course  )


----------



## Fa

AlexRuger said:


> 23 pages and I'm still not hearing anything that sounds remotely better than Garritan.
> 
> I'm genuinely baffled that anyone can find anything to like in this library. It's *really* not good, as if it's wearing its fakeness as a badge of honor. I felt the same way about their old solo viola.
> 
> Which is strange, considering their brass is the best in the business.



@AexRuger I want to start my comment with a clear statement that I think you are entitled to express your opinion, even if hardly negative, and all your comments are very welcome.

On the other side, I can't refrain from getting surprised by the lack of respect for other people with different opinions, and your following explanation made it sound even more self-referantial (I don't want to say "arrogant" but we are pretty close to it).

I'm actually in the number of the people loving this library, and the reason for loving it is I DID WORK WITH REAL STRINGS A LOT. Real strings have something more than just the isolated and frozen sound of a sample, that other libraries can't replicate, while SM Strings do.
And why you mix-up comments about ensemble and solos, so different in sound and performance and exclusivity?

In parallel, you make kind of technical statements, based on pretty low understanding of the technologies, and confusing "this approach" with AM physical modeling... hummm... it sounds to me a bit incoherent with your ethics about talking from high knowledge and experience. But that's off topic.

I understand your preference goes to a pretty different type of sonic features, it's a fair and respectable comment. I still don't understand the need of criticizing others with so superficial and disrespectful arguments. That's all.


----------



## lychee

AlexRuger said:


> 23 pages and I'm still not hearing anything that sounds remotely better than Garritan.





AlexRuger said:


> ...I'm pretty honest and objective. Perhaps too honest for your taste (not with the intent to harm, mind you), but definitely objective...



The problem here in my opinion is not to be honest and objective even though I agree with that, but rather to be constructive, so to analyze and describe exactly what is wrong with you in the sound.
I think to say that the sound looks like Garritan (even if this library does not sound so ugly) is Lowering and disrespectful towards the work of Samplemodeling, and towards those on this forum that like the sound of this program.

Yet like you, I'm not 100% convinced by the realism of the sound, but it depends on who makes the demos.
For example, Saxer's "Bottleship", Erik's "Schindler's List"... don't sound like Garritan, CS80 or Edirol for me (as I read here and there in these pages).

Now to be constructive, for me the problem of this library is that the sound is too straight and sometimes lacks humanity and as said earlier, it would take more chaos in all this.
Little chaos in pitch, bow noise, start time (for ensemble)...
I also have a problem with the sound of the bow which at times sounds more like a white noise or a breath than a bow, but this feeling again depends on the demos I could hear.

Finally, it would be important in my opinion for the Samplemodeling team to better communicate on this product, because audio demos are not enough, we consumers need to know more through a full video presentation.


----------



## Batrawi

lychee said:


> I also have a problem with the sound of the bow which at times sounds more like a white noise or a breath than a bow,


That's exactly what I'm hearing..the bow noise layer sounds more windy/fluty rather than being gritty/rosiny... Overall, I think the tone is still a step forward comparing it to the AM strings, so yeah definitely there seems to be a room for improvement and SM may be getting closer


----------



## Hanu_H

I think the main problem with SM Strings is that there is no expression baked in. When you play a sample library there is always some kind of expression. With SM Strings when you play a static sustain, it sounds lifeless and synthy. So it will definitely need a lot of knowledge how the strings sound and work to make it sound great. I am sure it will not replace all the sample libraries but it will find it's place in the arsenal of composers. I haven't bought it, but if I will, I am sure that if I need epic sounding shorts or massive longs, I will still go with other libraries.


----------



## bun

Hanu_H said:


> I think the main problem with SM Strings is that there is no expression baked in. When you play a sample library there is always some kind of expression.


The idea is that you personally add expression yourself like with a physical instrument. It's the opposite of a problem to me, this is what I always wanted.


----------



## lychee

Hanu_H said:


> I think the main problem with SM Strings is that there is no expression baked in. When you play a sample library there is always some kind of expression. With SM Strings when you play a static sustain, it sounds lifeless and synthy...



That exactly what i think.



bun said:


> The idea is that you personally add expression yourself like with a physical instrument...



This is the problem, I think the "humanity" of the sound of S&ES comes from what the sound is played by.

With a virtual wind instrument you have midi breath controllers to give life and play on all the parameters of the sound as for the real instrument.
Today, there are no tools to control all the parameters of the strings, even if it will always be more expressive to play this library with a breath controller.
But most will play with only keyboards and others, like me, will directly play the notes at the piano roll, and in these cases it is possible that the whole thing will sound less alive, even playing on vibrato and expression.

A string player who plays a sustained note, even if he wants to play straight will always make irregularities due to the random pressure he will exert and also the roughness of the bow hair.
I think that these irregularities should be introduced in the base of the sound rather than having to play on the multiple parameters (resonances, pitch, volume, time ...) buried in the library to make it alive.
But how do you do all this without creating phasing effects in an enssemble?...


----------



## David Cuny

servandus said:


> Hi, David, if you prefer WC mode, you can still control the portamento time with CC5, which you can assign to other controllers available in your wind controller (bite, etc.).


Thanks! 

Yes, there are lots of ways to modify this behavior, and control it with the WC, and I appreciate you pointing those out.

My observation was that using the out-of-the-box WC settings, moving from note to note - even at _ff_ - results in a portamento. 

I suspect that's not the intended behavior. 

This may in fact only be happening on _my_ USB EWI, and everyone else has a different experience. 

I had issues with with out-of-the-box WC settings for The Trumpet as well, and used the BC setting rather than bother to dig any deeper.


----------



## AlexRuger

Goooood lord. Seems that I’ve hit a nerve somewhere and don’t really care to respond to all of that/further derail this thread. My PM box is open if any of you care to discuss it further. I’m out.


----------



## servandus

Wow, just one day offline! I truly underestimated this forum! 🤣



AlexRuger said:


> I'm out.



Yup, job done, I'm out, right? 😎



AlexRuger said:


> Seems that I’ve hit a nerve somewhere



Seriously? Are you also baffled that you _"hit a nerve somewhere"_? Man, it's not about opinions, it's about basic manners._"I'm still not hearing anything that sounds remotely better than Garritan", "it's wearing its fakeness as a badge of honor ", "Taking a quick look at your profile, it looks like you worked on this product"_...???... Come on, man! Are we schoolboys here or what? Is that really how you've built a reputation of being knowledgable in this forum? 

Anyway, I haven't joined this forum to waste my time with this kind of childishness. I purchased SM strings, and want to make the best possible use of it in my work, because I see a huge potential in its sampling approach. I want to spend more time learning how it works, alone and with the other string libs I have. If someone else is interested, we could benefit for sure from sharing our findings. I'm really fed up of trying to fake a simple on-the-string collé or martellé bowing by layering an off-the-string spiccato on top of a legato/sustain patch, and calling it "a realistic bite". The fact that Giorgio and Peter are listening to our complains, and are working on it, is a rare opportunity I don't want to miss to be proactive as a user, because I really think that the future of virtual instruments will be based on some kind of hybrid technology which be able to finally close the gap between timbre realism and performance realism. Given the direction this thread has taken, maybe it'd be a good idea to open a new thread for this purpose, and leave this one for lovers and haters to express their feelings. I've no time for that.
_
_


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

I completely agree, Servandus. We've done our best, so far. We'll do our best in a next future. Especially if motivated by a constructive, honest criticism.


----------



## DANIELE

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> I completely agree, Servandus. We've done our best, so far. We'll do our best in a next future. Especially if motivated by a constructive, honest criticism.



I think your library is great!!



I hope I motivated you to do your best for this library with a lot of updates (it is already great).


----------



## Bollen

I do feel compelled to defend Alex a bit... His words were poorly chosen that's for sure, but his opinion is important for anybody who's still sitting on the fence on this one. I have been following this thread since the beginning and it seems the conversation is starting to go around in a circle. The demos have been great and much appreciated, but a lot of the "constructive" input that has been sated has yet to be addressed...

1.- Where are the walkthroughs?
2.- Where are the divisi demos?
3.- Where's the sloppiness that's been requested since page 1 (I think)

I have slowly been more seduced by the solo instruments demos (page by page) and I have been very vocal and technical about what is wrong with this library: it's too tight! There's no micro-pitch variations in the sound, the attack sounds like a synth attack, etc. Now without getting my hands on the actual product, it's hard to say what is a limitation of the library and what's on the user's side. The manual has certainly not answered any of my questions.

I love the people that have fallen in love with the library, I find them inspiring, but we also need the people that think this is shit and we need to hear their opinions as to why. I am heavily influenced with the real thing (I have spent 80-85% of my life hearing real string sections) so I find it all very unconvincing...


----------



## AlexRuger

servandus said:


> Man, it's not about opinions, it's about basic manners..._"Taking a quick look at your profile, it looks like you worked on this product"_...???... Come on, man! Are we schoolboys here or what? Is that really how you've built a reputation of being knowledgable in this forum?



Okay, I'll return for this one little question: how is "taking a quick look at your profile, it looks like you worked on this product" problematic? The first two phrases you mentioned, sure, I can see how you could interpret that as bad manners (I intended them to simply be exaggerated/colorful ways of describing what I felt was wrong with it -- again, not intended to harm -- but I can concede that I made a mistake in thinking that that would translate over text).

He said he was a developer (not "the" developer), and so I wondered if he was "sticking up for developers as a whole," so to speak, or had any connection to this product specifically. So, I took a quick look at his profile before responding and saw a lot of posts related to this product. Operative word being "quick." I just wanted some context.

I'm sorry, but I don't follow who makes what product. I don't know who the CEO of Native Instruments is, either. Had I spent more time on his profile, maybe it would've become clear that he's the lead, and not just part of the team. 

Regardless, I completely fail to see why you would pick that phrase out and say that it's "bad manners." Just doesn't make any sense to me. Can you explain?


----------



## Bollen

AlexRuger said:


> Okay, I'll return for this one little question: how is "taking a quick look at your profile, it looks like you worked on this product" problematic? The first two phrases you mentioned, sure, I can see how you could interpret that as bad manners (I intended them to simply be exaggerated/colorful ways of describing what I felt was wrong with it -- again, not intended to harm -- but I can concede that I made a mistake in thinking that that would translate over text).
> 
> He said he was a developer (not "the" developer), and so I wondered if he was "sticking up for developers as a whole," so to speak, or had any connection to this product specifically. So, I took a quick look at his profile before responding and saw a lot of posts related to this product. Operative word being "quick." I just wanted some context.
> 
> I'm sorry, but I don't follow who makes what product. I don't know who the CEO of Native Instruments is, either. Had I spent more time on his profile, maybe it would've become clear that he's the lead, and not just part of the team.
> 
> Regardless, I completely fail to see why you would pick that phrase out and say that it's "bad manners." Just doesn't make any sense to me. Can you explain?



I shouldn't jump in, but I think the main issue is that you said "this sounds like...." when we should really be constructive. I don't personally feel that this is "bad manners", but perhaps unnecessarily confrontational maybe?


----------



## I like music

All of this raises a puzzling (a genuinely puzzling) question for me. And it kind of makes me second-guess my own ears. I'm not referring to only this discussion, but to the fact that when we talk about _tone_ (I guess realism of the tone?) there are people who are taking the opposite stance to me, in terms of whether it sounds like a real section or not. To me (I own the strings) not only does it sound exactly like a string section (again I don't work with real strings, I merely own a violin that I mess around on) I also hear energy when I'm playing the samples (not 'sterile')

So this gets me thinking about whether I've completely misunderstood what a real section sounds like (perhaps I have? perhaps my ears aren't so good?). Wish I could swap ears with others and hear what they hear.

Anyhow, all I can say is that I own Hollywood Strings, CSS, and SM strings. I feel like SM strings will get _a lot_ of use. In fact, I didn't notice _that_ much of a difference between CSS and these, in terms of tone. For some people that difference is probably too big a gap, because yes, there is a difference, but to me it is insignificant.

Were I a more competent musician, I'd be posting many examples here to help everyone make up their mind. As it stands, I get to play about with music for 30 minutes a day if I'm lucky, so I'm still in the process of getting this embedded into my template. Perhaps a few weeks from now, I'll be able to post one of the few mockups I've planned using these strings (I'm talking ensembles here)


----------



## AlexRuger

Bollen said:


> I shouldn't jump in, but I think the main issue is that you said "this sounds like...." when we should really be constructive. I don't personally feel that this is "bad manners", but perhaps unnecessarily confrontational maybe?


I'm specifically asking about the phrase "taking a quick look at your profile, it looks like you worked on this product" and why servandus thinks that's an example of bad manners.


----------



## Sears Poncho

AlexRuger said:


> Strings are tricky beasts to capture realism, and the old sample-based approach has produced great results thus far. Or maybe it's just too early to tell, and I'll eat my words in a few years. Who knows. I'm open to being proven wrong, but I don't particularly care how my awesome string library is producing its sound, beyond it sounding awesome.



OK, this quote got me to enter the thread. Great Googly Moogly! I agree 10,000%.

I'm a pro violinist. A damn good one with the resume and the callouses and the neck thingy and the childhood spent in practice rooms to prove it.  As I recently mentioned in another thread: the Joshua Bell violin samples? I went to school with Josh, we both spent a summer as whippersnappers practicing. The Josh Bell product sounds fantastic. Let's all thank Josh for practicing hard, I assure you he did because I was 2 dorm rooms away. Because he did that, we can now take notes and tone he learned, assemble them on our computers, and it sounds pretty damn good. Thanks Josh!

I like the idea of SWAM/modeling etc. Indeed, some of the demos I heard sounded cool and expressive. Nice job! Didn't particularly strike me, a guy with a neck hickey in his 50s, as "violinistic" but I admire lots about it.

OK, here comes the fun part: It's... Jurassic Park!!

_If I may... Um, I'll tell you the problem with the scientific power that you're using here, it didn't require any discipline to attain it. You read what others had done and you took the next step. You didn't earn the knowledge for yourselves, so you don't take any responsibility for it._

That's kinda involved here a bit, in addition to other factors. The passionate defenders of the product are saying 'it's a valid, expressive musical instrument' and it probably is. 2 things though:

1. It ain't a violin
2. You (probably) don't know how to play a violin 

And for that matter, I don't know how to play the trumpet. Or oboe. Or most of the other stuff. Therefore, I buy lil sample recordings made from people who do know how to play them and manipulate them on my computer.

On strings, things like "slides" are how one shifts. If one just slides any old place, it sounds like a drunk Ravi Shankar. Violin is complex af, and the complexities aren't really captured...yet... with certain aspects of modeling. And the sound ain't there yet, because some of the technical complexities ( i.e. "bow") can't be captured without horse hair and a stick. And the "knowledge" isn't there. The technical knowledge of playing the instrument and all the pitfalls etc to avoid just ain't there. I'm assuming it needs more "sample" and less "modeling" or something. I think when we get a 20 gig SWAM package we might be all in the SWAM camp. And as I said I think it's a cool product.

But... if someone gives me some sort of "trumpet imitator", that's nice and all... but I don't know how to play the trumpet. I don't know how many seconds I can hold the high note until I pass out, and I don't know what laundry detergents gets valve spit outta concert shirts. I don't know any brass jokes, only viola jokes.

Bottom line: when Sample modeling has truly arrived (and once again, great job to the creator of the SWAM products), then kids will be dragged by their moms to SM lessons where some dude says "OK Junior, let's hear a 2 octave G minor scale then take out your Etude book".


----------



## Bollen

AlexRuger said:


> I'm specifically asking about the phrase "taking a quick look at your profile, it looks like you worked on this product" and why servandus thinks that's an example of bad manners.



Yes, yes of course, I understand. I was just trying to say that if you follow his/her sentences, the last one being the one you mention, leads to the assumption that he/she is already pissed off and perhaps, maybe one could conclude that there's nothing specific to be addressed but rather a bunch of things were said that pissed people off and pissed off arguments can never be taken literally because people lose logic and a bit of reasoning when their emotions are affected...


----------



## bun

Sears Poncho said:


> I don't know how to play the trumpet. Or oboe. Or most of the other stuff. Therefore, I buy lil sample recordings made from people who do know how to play them and manipulate them on my computer.
> (...)
> But... if someone gives me some sort of "trumpet imitator", that's nice and all... but I don't know how to play the trumpet. I don't know how many seconds I can hold the high note until I pass out



Might as well just stick to a Mellotron if you're that scared of not programming an instrument like a professional player.

Seriously, I don't see how stitching together audio recordings is going to achieve faking playing an instrument any better if we're going by your logic.


----------



## Sears Poncho

bun said:


> Might as well just stick to a Mellotron if you're that scared of not programming an instrument like a professional player.


No offense, but you come off as a real idiot here. OK I lied. "Some" offense. 



bun said:


> Seriously, I don't see how stitching together audio recordings is going to achieve faking playing an instrument any better if we're going by your logic.



It has nothing to do with my "logic", or me at all. Use your ears. There's a recording/mockup, I assume on the Embertone site, of JB and the Mendelssohn concerto. Listen to it. It's amazing. Logic or not. It's because the cat knows how to play and there was an excellent attempt at capturing that. 

Listen to this. Listen to the slides. Dafuq?? What the hell are those? Sorry but that just ain't how it works, which was/is my point. Those aren't violin slides. The way some of the short notes end aren't even in the ballpark. The instrument is capable of making them, but it's not currently capable of making them in a convincing way. 

Or... do you think it is? Do you think that's a convincing violin sound? Cause...wow.


----------



## I like music

Sears Poncho said:


> No offense, but you come off as a real idiot here. OK I lied. "Some" offense.
> 
> 
> 
> It has nothing to do with my "logic", or me at all. Use your ears. There's a recording/mockup, I assume on the Embertone site, of JB and the Mendelssohn concerto. Listen to it. It's amazing. Logic or not. It's because the cat knows how to play and there was an excellent attempt at capturing that.
> 
> Listen to this. Listen to the slides. Dafuq?? What the hell are those? Sorry but that just ain't how it works, which was/is my point. Those aren't violin slides. The way some of the short notes end aren't even in the ballpark. The instrument is capable of making them, but it's not currently capable of making them in a convincing way.
> 
> Or... do you think it is? Do you think that's a convincing violin sound? Cause...wow.




Just want to confirm that you're not confusing Audiomodeling's offering with Samplemodeling's offering...

[EDIT] Oh wait, this isn't an official developer/announcement thread. I guess it's alright to talk about AM's stuff, but just wanted to be sure you weren't confusing the two, since that does tend to happen, given the companies' histories.


----------



## Sears Poncho

I like music said:


> Just want to confirm that you're not confusing Audiomodeling's offering with Samplemodeling's offering...


No, I just used it as an overall example of modeling in general and some of the problems with it.


----------



## I like music

Sears Poncho said:


> No, I just used it as an overall example of modeling in general and some of the problems with it.



I see.


----------



## I like music

Sears Poncho said:


> No, I just used it as an overall example of modeling in general and some of the problems with it.



I don't know how SM is approaching it, but the tone to my ears is much more convincing than AM's stuff. I will caveat this by saying that while I am learning to play the violin, I've only been doing it less than a year, so my playing actually sounds less like a violin than version of a violin you can play on those $50 digital keyboards :D


----------



## Bollen

I like music said:


> I don't know how SM is approaching it, but the tone to my ears is much more convincing than AM's stuff. I will caveat this by saying that while I am learning to play the violin, I've only been doing it less than a year, so my playing actually sounds less like a violin than version of a violin you can play on those $50 digital keyboards :D



I agree, SM is considerably better and so were their saxophones in the old days... But I also agree with everything Poncho says.


----------



## Fa

OMG @Sears Poncho again and again? You may talk abut violin and it's ok, but please at least before talking about SWAM, AM, and Sample Modeling, try to get the difference: it's like if you were discussing abut your fine orchestral violin, and a guy tells you "ah... yes this one, isn't it?" and shows to you a rock electric violin playing with drive distortion...


----------



## Sears Poncho

Fa said:


> OMG @Sears Poncho again and again? You may talk abut violin and it's ok, but please at least before talking about SWAM, AM, and Sample Modeling, try to get the difference: it's like if you were discussing abut your fine orchestral violin, and a guy tells you "ah... yes this one, isn't it?" and shows to you a rock electric violin playing with drive distortion...


Fair enough.... but is that all you picked up from my rant? 'cause if so..... damn!
Can you point to any examples of solo violin SWAMAMPMS&M modeling doo-hickeys that you find convincing? I'd like to hear one.


----------



## Fa

Sears Poncho said:


> Fair enough.... but is that all you picked up from my rant? 'cause if so..... damn!
> Can you point to any examples of solo violin SWAMAMPMS&M modeling doo-hickeys that you find convincing? I'd like to hear one.



Nope, I agree with lot of what you say. It's pretty obvious that with a keyboard and pedals and breath controllers, what you get is similar to an hybrid organ-sax... translating it in a bowing string instrument sounds a bit challenging LOL

But there's a lot of difference between physical modeling and samples, and SM stays in between.

You refer to SWAM and AM demos... they have nothing to do with this thread product, not just because it's from another company, and because of the technology, but also because of the sound and usability.


----------



## Sears Poncho

Fa said:


> You refer to SWAM and AM demos... they have nothing to do with this thread product, not just because it's from another company, and because of the technology, but also because of the sound and usability.


Yes, you graciously pointed out, as you are again, that I got the wrong name of the product by Tommasini (who is in this thread just above) and Peter S (I'm not gonna try and spell that). Siedlaczek, that's it, I had his old sample libraries. And I said "Fair enough".
So, now that we've settled that I got the name/terminology/doohickey wrong of the product of the guy who just posted in the thread recently, now what? 

If anyone could point me to a convincing, realistic and enjoyable demo of a non-traditional program with modeling blah blah, I would buy it. Right now. And that was part of my point and I believe Alex's as well. I don't care what it's called, how it works, whether I am master synthesis mad scientist modeler or just some schlub throwing down samples. I get paid to do orchestrations/recordings etc and my bank account doesn't give a sh#t what I call products, mistakenly or not.


----------



## Fa

Sears Poncho said:


> Yes, you graciously pointed out, as you are again, that I got the wrong name of the product by Tommasini (who is in this thread just above) and Peter S (I'm not gonna try and spell that). Siedlaczek, that's it, I had his old sample libraries. And I said "Fair enough".
> So, now that we've settled that I got the name/terminology/doohickey wrong of the product of the guy who just posted in the thread recently, now what?
> 
> If anyone could point me to a convincing, realistic and enjoyable demo of a non-traditional program with modeling blah blah, I would buy it. Right now. And that was part of my point and I believe Alex's as well. I don't care what it's called, how it works, whether I am master synthesis mad scientist modeler or just some schlub throwing down samples. I get paid to do orchestrations/recordings etc and my bank account doesn't give a sh#t what I call products, mistakenly or not.



Sorry but I don't get your point. We had some little demos just few posts away, that show the difference between AM and SM, and sorry to insist, it has nothing to do with names or companies.

It's about the sound and the usability. You were praising J.Bell violin... may YOU point to a convincing demo out of it? The demos posted by some users in this thread are the benchmark, and the videos on YouTube of J.Bell violin, can't get any close, just sounding as the usual cold and artificial patchwork of badly glued sounds, like ALL the sampled violins existing on the market.

Nobody say VI can play like a real Violin here, it's a useless discussion, because all of us agree.

We think this product is actually a valid one for the purpose of VI: actually the SM solo makes things that no other product can do, as a matter of facts.

If you don't like it, and I do like it, what's the problem? We will live happy in any case. Peace and Love.

EDIT: forgot to mention that the samples of SM Solo Violin, are played by a damn good professional violinist in Warsaw. Not sure if you got that the Sample Modeling instruments are NOT synthesized with physical modeling at all.


----------



## Sears Poncho

Fa said:


> Sorry but I don't get your point.



Yes, this is clear. I think I'll do something more constructive now, have a nice evening.


----------



## Fa

Sears Poncho said:


> Yes, this is clear. I think I'll do something more constructive now, have a nice evening.


You see? I told you we agree on so much things. It's a good idea and I'm doing the same. Have a nice evening you too!


----------



## bun

I don't think SWAM strings need to be thrown under the bus to prove the value of SM Strings...


----------



## clisma

To me Alex’ and Poncho’s arguments feel myopic.

Consider this a first good step toward what may come in the future. Samples have hit a ceiling. There has been little real, significant innovation in how we sample and then stitch these samples together to make meaningful music in the last decade or so.

From the get-go, whether it’s Spitfire or SM, all of these are tools we use to transmit an idea to the musicians who will then record the real thing; that should be the aim.

With that in mind, it seems rather pointless to argue about one aspect only of this library, namely how realistic it sounds, when we could agree, genuinely that samples might sound closer but don’t have the flexibility this allows, whether you’re a string player or not (by that logic we should not attempt to record anything at all anyway). It’s close enough for some things, and will likely get better by moving the puck forward. That’s what counts here.

But those of us who work in the media industry might do well to remember that there are many more musicians and composers interested in this kind of technology who do not require the same level of realism in order to pitch to producers and directors. For those folks, this is already good enough if not superb.


----------



## AlexRuger

clisma said:


> To me Alex’ and Poncho’s arguments feel myopic.



I very literally said that I'm open to being proven wrong, and that I hope the product gets better in the future. That is the exact opposite of myopic.


----------



## clisma

AlexRuger said:


> I very literally said that I'm open to being proven wrong, and that I hope the product gets better in the future. That is the exact opposite of myopic.


Ok.


----------



## Fa

bun said:


> I don't think SWAM strings need to be thrown under the bus to prove the value of SM Strings...


Not at all! 
They are an amazing piece of engineering, with a wide and exclusive range of musical applications. They have the ability of replicating gestures and behaviour impossible with sampled instruments.

Last but not least they open new scenarios for future development.

But when we have "philosophic" discussions about "modeling" being wrong or not, and why, it's important and unavoidable to make a clear difference between technologies, and sonic results, being the strength and weakness of the 2 products SO different.


----------



## Daniel Taylor

All this debating is fine and all but boys...I'm scrolling through this thread looking for audio examples, don't leave me hanging 😎


----------



## pmcrockett

So I'm finding upon starting to record things with this that a breath controller actually isn't working very well at all. I've been doing a first pass with the breath controller and then going back through and penciling in modifications. Note cutoffs and connections, especially, are hard to get right with the breath controller. I like how the ensembles sound when you ramp expression up into the next note or into the cutoff, but it's difficult to do this precisely with the breath controller. And there are certain expression shapes that sound good on short notes that just can't be created at all with a breath controller. It's a matter of precision, mostly -- the library responds so nimbly to such a variety of expression changes that relying on live expression input actually seems to make the library sound less musical rather than more, and I'm thinking that the key to optimal results may be detailed pencil work after recording rather than trying to capture the best live recording.


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

pmcrockett said:


> So I'm finding upon starting to record things with this that a breath controller actually isn't working very well at all. I've been doing a first pass with the breath controller and then going back through and penciling in modifications. Note cutoffs and connections, especially, are hard to get right with the breath controller. I like how the ensembles sound when you ramp expression up into the next note or into the cutoff, but it's difficult to do this precisely with the breath controller. And there are certain expression shapes that sound good on short notes that just can't be created at all with a breath controller. It's a matter of precision, mostly -- the library responds so nimbly to such a variety of expression changes that relying on live expression input actually seems to make the library sound less musical rather than more, and I'm thinking that the key to optimal results may be detailed pencil work after recording rather than trying to capture the best live recording.




pmcrockett,

Could you please be more specific about your sentence that "breath controller isn't working very well at all"? Breath controller works as it should, and exactly like it did with our brass, with the additional advancement that retriggering perfectly works. I don't share your opinion that these virtual instruments need detailed pencil work after recording. I actually think the opposite. These instruments are conceived for real time work. Of course, since they offer so many controllers, some refinement may be necessary, unless the player has perfect knowledge of the controllers and the keyswitches. But again, in an effort to get some constructive criticism, could you explain what you mean by that sentence? We are here to help. Please try to help as well.


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

Daniel Taylor said:


> All this debating is fine and all but boys...I'm scrolling through this thread looking for audio examples, don't leave me hanging 😎



You made the point. What we need are examples of what can be done with conventional libraries mimicking a certain phrase, and what can or cannot be done with our virtual instruments. What we don't need are expressions like: "_23 pages and I'm still not hearing anything that sounds remotely better than Garritan. I'm genuinely baffled that anyone can find anything to like in this library. It's *really* not good, as if it's wearing its fakeness as a badge of honor. I felt the same way about their old solo viola_".

Again, these very superficial comments, confusing physically modeled instrument, like swam solo strings, with sample-based instruments like SM Solo & Ensemble Strings, are not constructive criticism. And as such, they are completely useless, if the purpose of this forum is to help developers to improve their products.


----------



## germancomponist

As a side note: Convolution reverbs etc. are mostly sound-killers! They have less or nothing to do with the reality.
This Samplemodeling string library is great, but yeah, who wants to controll anything? Yeah, I am one of them .... .


----------



## I like music

germancomponist said:


> As a side note: Convolution reverbs etc. are mostly sound-killers! They have less or nothing to do with the reality.
> This Samplemodeling string library is great, but yeah, who wants to controll anything? Yeah, I am one of them .... .



Would you mind clarifying? I only use convolution (just because that's all I have!).


----------



## germancomponist

I like music said:


> Would you mind clarifying? I only use convolution (just because that's all I have!).


I think convolution reverb sounds kinda dead. I like the sound of old analogue reverbs much more. And yes, this is only my opinion. 
Just experiment!


----------



## I like music

germancomponist said:


> I think convolution reverb sounds kinda dead. I like the sound of old analogue reverbs much more. And yes, this is only my opinion.
> Just experiment!



I've spent all my money! Will try one of the not-convo reverbs that come with cubase. Unless you are referring only to hardware/separate verbs. Anything I can look into?


----------



## germancomponist

Experiment with the Cubase Algo verb. It is a very good reverb. I use these Lexicon reverbs as plugins now, but that Cubase Algo verb ist very good ...., at least to my ears.


----------



## AlexRuger

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> ...if the purpose of this forum is to help developers to improve their products.



I think that might be the crux of the problem, here. Never have I ever gotten the impression that that's the point of this forum.


----------



## Jonathan Moray

AlexRuger said:


> I think that might be the crux of the problem, here. Never have I ever gotten the impression that that's the point of this forum.



I believe you. Since you haven't been very helpful at all through this entire debacle. No constructive criticism, insulting other members, saying you're going to leave the debate but coming back again and again just to add a little bit of flame to the whole thing. Seems like you think the forum is here to insult both developers and members, which I strongly believe is not the purpose, since the slogan is "Musicians Helping Musicians". Most devs here are musicians.

Either way, let's just all go on with our lives and accept our differences. Be the bigger man and step away. You're derailing the thread for the people who want to get info about the library or just interested in seeing the possibilities. You shouldn't respond to this post either.

Just so everyone here is clear; I'm not saying I believe you should only post if you have something nice to say, I'm saying post as much as you want, as long as it contributes to the thread. That is to say via suggestions, question, constructive criticism. Just saying "It sounds bad." is not going to help anyone. Not the people looking at the product nor the devs. There's nothing to go on with a statement like that.


----------



## AlexRuger

To be clear: I'm not trying to "flame" anything. I was simply pointing out a difference of expectations -- with the intention of diplomacy, actually -- which seems to be unique to this thread. Other threads about products seem to rarely if ever have that expectation, and thus generally negative posts tend to slide on by and taken as part of the general discussion. As far as I can tell, the expectation of "constructive criticism" seems to only exist here because the developer is actually present (which I didn't know at the time of posting, and had I known, I would have chosen my words a little more carefully, because as I've stated more than once, I didn't say that to harm). 

I guess there's something about how my tone translates through text incorrectly? Or maybe this forum has really changed a lot. I haven't posted on here nearly as much as I did a few years ago, so maybe I'm just wrong and this forum has actually turned into a place for developers to get feedback. I still browse quite a bit, I just don't post as much, but I suppose it's possible I might have missed a change like that. 

But either way, it appears to be a mismatch of expectations, and I was just trying to get to the bottom of why what seemed to me to be a pretty business-as-usual post for this place suddenly created a firestorm. I mean, in this same thread, someone straight up called someone else an idiot, and no one said a thing. 

Speaking of: can you please quote me insulting anyone? I haven't *at all.* Don't know how you came to that conclusion. I just...haven't, and wouldn't. 

But, okay. I hear you loud and clear. With that, I'm (actually) out.


----------



## Jonathan Moray

Just a heads up if you've missed it (I did) they added two more demos to their website. I didn't see any posts about it. @Daniel Taylor

You can check it out here.
https://www.samplemodeling.com/en/demos_strings.php
Summer Leaves
"Humoresque" No.7, Op.101 (Cello)


----------



## Daniel Taylor

@Jonathan Moray Thanks for that, I would indeed have missed this. Still waiting for more examples before making any decisions on this as what I've heard so far has varied all the way from "Close to the real thing" to "Synth Keyboard".

Also; I've found nothing in terms of a general overview or walkthrough video of the instrument itself. Could someone that has it please make one if they have the time ?

Thanks again all.


----------



## Vardaro

Jonathan Moray said:


> You can check it out here.


Nice!
Constructive comments on the tone (_not_ on the playing..):
- Summer Leaves has a sexy-saxy sound _which I often find in jazz violin. 
-_ In Humoreque,I find the upper range, (basically the A-string notes) rather nasal in both cello and viola, compared to e.g. Embertone's ISS. Admittedly though, real violas and cellos are often fitted with harsh A-strings. But it will take time to manually sweeten just those notes, as the samples are not accessible.. Overall EQ would spoil the lower ranges.

And I _like _the ensemble sound, and I too play in, and listen to recordings of, string ensembles...


----------



## Jonathan Moray

Daniel Taylor said:


> @Jonathan Moray Thanks for that, I would indeed have missed this. Still waiting for more examples before making any decisions on this as what I've heard so far has varied all the way from "Close to the real thing" to "Synth Keyboard".
> 
> Also; I've found nothing in terms of a general overview or walkthrough video of the instrument itself. Could someone that has it please make one if they have the time ?
> 
> Thanks again all.



I agree. The range of tone and believability has varied greatly depending on who's made the demo. That's the beauty of the library I think, it's very malleable and you can form it to fit your needs. At least that's the impression I've got so far. Also it's the same with SM Brass.

The down fall, as stated multiples times before, it's very easy to make it sound bad if you get lazy and just want something simple to just play and have the library itself add all the expression.



Vardaro said:


> Nice!
> Constructive comments on the tone (_not_ on the playing..):
> - Summer Leaves has a sexy-saxy sound _which I often find in jazz violin.
> -_ In Humoreque,I find the upper range, (basically the A-string notes) rather nasal in both cello and viola, compared to e.g. Embertone's ISS. Admittedly though, real violas and cellos are often fitted with harsh A-strings. But it will take time to manually sweeten just those notes, as the samples are not accessible.. Overall EQ would spoil the lower ranges.
> 
> And I _like _the ensemble sound, and I too play in, and listen to recordings of, string ensembles...



My thoughts as well. Would love to get my hand on it to see what I can do. Hoping someone I know will buy it soon so I can test it properly.

Not a fan of any of the new demos. Mostly because they don't fit any of my needs. The Cello in Humoreque sounds of to me, something about the harshness in the upper range. The Violin in summer leaves sounds good for jazz.

The timbral shaping tool is amazing and I've not seen many people talk about it or posted any demos of using it to shape the sound of the instruments.


----------



## Bollen

Daniel Taylor said:


> @Jonathan Moray Thanks for that, I would indeed have missed this. Still waiting for more examples before making any decisions on this as what I've heard so far has varied all the way from "Close to the real thing" to "Synth Keyboard".
> 
> Also; I've found nothing in terms of a general overview or walkthrough video of the instrument itself. Could someone that has it please make one if they have the time ?
> 
> Thanks again all.



Yes I totally agree with your assessment! I still can't believe nobody has bothered to make a quick walkthrough... And on that subject, that the developer, whose present in this thread, still hasn't answered questions that have been asked since page 1....?

Also, on a personal opinion, I think it was a mistake to just have one bundled package. I would've happily spent a few £ to demo say the violin, but like others have pointed out, no way I'm spending hundreds on what so far sounds like a synth to me... (I remind those who have not read from the beginning that I am a massive fan of samplemodelling).


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

Vardaro and J. Moray,

I completely agree with your evaluations. True, the timbre of the cello, nasal in the middle-upper range cannot be cured only by the Body IR, since this tends to spoil the lower range. We are currently submitting several samples to delicate surgery.


----------



## Garry

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> Vardaro and J. Moray,
> 
> I completely agree with your evaluations. True, the timbre of the cello, nasal in the middle-upper range cannot be cured only by the Body IR, since this tends to spoil the lower range. We are currently submitting several samples to delicate surgery.


I really respect and admire your honesty in acknowledging that, and your commitment to improving your product in response to customer feedback. Great stuff!

However, in light of your comment (indicating that additional work is required to achieve a sound that is acceptable to you) and the lack of walkthrough video (that many potential customers on this thread have requested, and is key for many of us in making purchasing decisions, it being the only available means to fully evaluate the product somewhat transparently, in a way that demos do not achieve), may I respectfully suggest you consider extending your intro pricing period until these 2 issues are resolved. Like others in this thread, I’m a sample modeling customer, and love some of your products, and hoping you’re successful with this one too, but the above are now prerequisites for me before I buy libraries, and perhaps for others too?


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

yes, we will prolong the early bird period to the end of October. And we will provide free updates improving the product. What we have done so far is the fruit of four years of very hard work. It's a decent product. Not perfect. But perfection is our final aim.


----------



## DANIELE

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> yes, we will prolong the early bird period to the end of October. And we will provide free updates improving the product. What we have done so far is the fruit of four years of very hard work. It's a decent product. Not perfect. But perfection is our final aim.



Exactly what I think, I'm still rebuilding my template and I did a few tries, I'm actually rebuild everything with a new positional reverb configuration. I think this product it is already superior to many other libraries out there but at the same time I think that there is space for improovements, I hope this library will grow as I think.
Actually I could say I almost deleted other strings libraries from my template, I want to get the best possible result from SM Strings.

I'll post something once I'll have time to do it, as "I Like Music" I work full day and I have a really little time for music.


----------



## pmcrockett

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> pmcrockett,
> 
> Could you please be more specific about your sentence that "breath controller isn't working very well at all"? Breath controller works as it should, and exactly like it did with our brass, with the additional advancement that retriggering perfectly works. I don't share your opinion that these virtual instruments need detailed pencil work after recording. I actually think the opposite. These instruments are conceived for real time work. Of course, since they offer so many controllers, some refinement may be necessary, unless the player has perfect knowledge of the controllers and the keyswitches. But again, in an effort to get some constructive criticism, could you explain what you mean by that sentence? We are here to help. Please try to help as well.



To be clear, when I say that a breath controller isn't great, I'm talking mostly in terms of my initial expectation that my workflow would mostly consist of recording several takes then using the best one, whereas I'm finding now that my preferred workflow seems to be to record a single take then do touch ups on it. I haven't found anything better than a breath controller for that first take, though -- I'll try using a Leap Motion controller for expression at some point and see how that goes, though whenever I've tried to do that for other libraries, I've always ended up ultimately coming back to the breath controller.

There are several things involved here.

To me, the most notable element at play is that pencil editing has turned out to be a lot more straight forward than I expected it to be, and this kind of fits with my impression of the library as hitting the sweet spot between traditional sampling and pure modeling. Editing on traditional libraries is finicky because I have to deal with a bunch of keyswitches and sample offsets and have to be careful about dynamic layers and generally make sure all the pieces are glued together correctly. And more purely modeled instruments (the AM strings in particular) are a pain to hand edit because I usually record like six or seven different CCs, and any one of those CCs being in the wrong range at the wrong time will throw the whole model off. But I'm finding that the SM strings respond to expression edits exactly how I expect them to -- so well, in fact, that I almost don't need to listen back to changes I make, because unlike so many other libraries, those changes sound exactly like they look in the sequencer. So it makes the process of hand editing after recording much less of a pain, and makes me more willing to involve hand editing in my workflow.

This contrast between how traditional libraries read expression and how the SM strings read expression is key, because the bar for what you can do with expression in a traditional library is really very low, and this means that using a breath controller to drive a traditional library is usually very straight forward. As long as your expression level is generally in the right place, you're good. Nuances in attacks and transitions come from keyswitching, not expression. Whereas with the SM strings, the response to expression is so detailed that very minor adjustments are audible, large jumps in expression frequently still sound good, and most of the nuance comes from the expression data itself.

I have some difficulty, as mentioned in passing by others in this thread, with using a breath controller to mimic string behavior such as phrasing and bowing rather than wind behavior. It's a process I'm still not entirely comfortable with, and I find that hand editing makes it easier for me to bring out the nuance in things such bow changes and attack/release. Now that I'm developing some sense of what sorts of edits I end up doing after recording, it's possible that adjusting my breath controller settings and/or incorporating vel. to expression would help me capture some of those things in performance.

I tend to be a better editor than performer in general, so that's certainly also a contributing factor, but I feel like this is kind of a case where the software tech has started to outstrip the capabilities of the hardware interface that we use to interact with it. This is neither surprising nor particularly disappointing, because from what I've seen cutting edge libraries/synths/etc. tend to drive MIDI interface innovation and not vice verse.

Anyway, I don't think this all represents anything about SM Strings that necessarily needs to be fixed or modified. Like I said above, in terms of sequencing, the library responds to expression data exactly how I want it to. The difficulty for me is in generating exactly the data I want with the precision I want in realtime using a breath controller as the interface. I think this is a case of the library revealing the breath controller's weaknesses and/or my weaknesses as a breath controller user rather than of the controller revealing the library's weaknesses. If I had to choose between the expression data being easily hand editable but not getting the exact breath controller results I want vs. the library getting those results by responding to expression in a way that was more difficult to hand edit, I think I'd take the first option, which is the way things currently are.


----------



## NYC Composer

clisma said:


> Samples have hit a ceiling.


Will someone please mention this to Spitfire Audio? Clearly, now that the fin-de-siecle has occurred, they’ll need to find something else to do....


----------



## Jonathan Moray

NYC Composer said:


> Will someone please mention this to Spitfire Audio? Clearly, now that the fin-de-siecle has occurred, they’ll need to find something else to do....



I wouldn't go as far as to say that samples have hit a ceiling, but it's diminishing returns at this point. Samples can always get better but the work needed for it might not be worth it. If your just doing mock-ups to then later have a real orchestra play it the samples don't really matter all to much. But pure samples have always been somewhat limiting when you want to add your own expression to them, they still manage this surprisingly well, but the reality is that they are just static recordings / performances played back. You can fade between layers of dynamics, you can fade between vibrato and no-vibrato. But the way the vibrato is played is still determined by the original performance, or if you want to fade between dynamics/vibrato you can hear multiple players at the same time. This is more prominent with chamber and solo. Depending on what kind of workflow your after and what you want the instruments to do, samples might be perfect for you. I've heard people do some amazing things with just samples, even older samples.

But I, and I believe many others, want to play our instruments. If I want a note between the length of a, what most devs would call, marcato and staccato. I just play it that way and its good to go. If I want a very delicate vibrato I just play it that way. Musically Sampling has gotten the closest to playable patches with traditional sampling but they are very limited. They are good at two or maybe three things, but they are not instruments that can go from playing fast reppetition to soft lyrical lines in the same patch, or split into a2/divsi and play harmony.

Not sure why you would mention SF since they have, in my opinion, gotten worse over the years. I hope their new product is as groundbreaking as they believe it is and I hope it does well. But it seems like just more of the same... or maybe even less of the same. Sure they finally have some nice consistency with everything being recorded in the same room with the same concept, but that should've been the plan from the get-go if you ask me.


----------



## clisma

NYC Composer said:


> Will someone please mention this to Spitfire Audio? Clearly, now that the fin-de-siecle has occurred, they’ll need to find something else to do....


If you’ve ever played around with Bohemian Violin, it quickly becomes evident what needs to happen to allow more/quicker achievement of musicality with recorded samples (nevermind the near impossibility of the logistics and pricing of that approach outside the scope of a solo instrument). And I know you use the SM Brass: how do we compare that to samples? It’s a world of difference in playability and musicality. And that ceiling mentioned above is not about tone, or recording technique, and certainly not about way-too-bloody-many mic positions; it’s about getting more of what’s in your head into the DAW. Like real players interpreting your music live. 

Some are getting closer: Performance Samples, Infinite series. Perhaps there will be more soon. But they all have more work to do. At least they’re innovating. Not sure where Spitfire stands in genuinely allowing a more musical performance via samples, but I sure do like their Evo line. I long for a future with samples where the recording of a piece will take less time than the writing.


----------



## Ashermusic

For me personally, as a piano, player, I would love it if by simply playing what I want I get most of what I want. But at the end of doings so, if the tone and overall sound is not pleasing to me, I have accomplished little I will use.

Not saying that has to be true with this library but so far the only examples I have heard where I liked the sound, it was layered with other libraries.


----------



## NYC Composer

clisma said:


> If you’ve ever played around with Bohemian Violin, it quickly becomes evident what needs to happen to allow more/quicker achievement of musicality with recorded samples (nevermind the near impossibility of the logistics and pricing of that approach outside the scope of a solo instrument). And I know you use the SM Brass: how do we compare that to samples? It’s a world of difference in playability and musicality. And that ceiling mentioned above is not about tone, or recording technique, and certainly not about way-too-bloody-many mic positions; it’s about getting more of what’s in your head into the DAW. Like real players interpreting your music live.
> 
> Some are getting closer: Performance Samples, Infinite series. Perhaps there will be more soon. But they all have more work to do. At least they’re innovating. Not sure where Spitfire stands in genuinely allowing a more musical performance via samples, but I sure do like their Evo line. I long for a future with samples where the recording of a piece will take less time than the writing.



Yes, I probably should have included a smiley, ‘cause I was mostly being ironic. My point was that from a profit and wide distribution standpoint, Spitfire seems to be killing it with pure sampling technology, different rooms and intense marketing. Companies like SM and AM have a much smaller piece of the pie. 

To be serious, as you noted, I use SM brass extensively and also SWAM clarinets and saxes. For me the future of VIs is either modeling, some sort of hybrid or even newer technologies. When I use SM’s The Trumpet, I feel like I am actually playing a trumpet. I play everything in live- I want that feeling from everything I use. Maybe someday.


----------



## Vardaro

Just to remind us that the AM woodwinds and saxes are sample based, unlike their strings, which use waveguide synthesis.


----------



## clisma

NYC Composer said:


> Yes, I probably should have included a smiley, ‘cause I was mostly being ironic.


And that started becoming apparent to me way after I'd responded. Shame on me for taking you seriously 

Spitfire's upcoming Orchestra looks intriguing to say the least. But I don't know if it does anything to advance playability in the way we discussed above. You're right of course, they are doing well within the market. Maybe that's the problem: this stuff still sells well enough that they don't feel the need to improve the recipe. Pure conjecture of course.


----------



## zigzag

I've been saving up for a quality strings library and I must say all these options are making the decision really hard 

Here's a Beethoven's 5th Symphony created with SM Strings, OT Berlins Strings & some real recordings for comparison. None of this is my, just stuff I found online. 

*SM Strings:*
 


*Berlin Strings:*



*Real performances:*




IMHO
Tone/timbre realism: OT Berlin wins
Flow (how notes are connected): SM wins

I'm leaning towards SM Strings as the performance sounds much more musical to me, despite the less realistic tone.


----------



## servandus

Yes, it's becoming really difficult to choose what strings to buy, but, at the same time, I think we composers are extremely lucky that there's so many different options available on the market (some of them truly outstanding libraries). I guess you should take into account the kind of music you write, and your production needs, and then choose accordingly. It's probably best to have at least two very different options at your disposal, so that you can choose which one to use depending on the project (or use both), but I agree 100% with you: if we're talking about musical plasticity and flexibility, SM is very difficult to beat (listen to this little Bach excerpt).


----------



## eli0s

servandus said:


> (listen to this little Bach excerpt)


More like this please


----------



## lychee

eli0s said:


> More like this please


I agree, we need more like this to be convinced by SM strings. 
As I said before and more I listen some demos, this library have good sounding but it depend on who composed the demos.
Finally I think some people's here need to learn more this library to be closer to the real things.


----------



## Bollen

servandus said:


> Yes, it's becoming really difficult to choose what strings to buy, but, at the same time, I think we composers are extremely lucky that there's so many different options available on the market (some of them truly outstanding libraries). I guess you should take into account the kind of music you write, and your production needs, and then choose accordingly. It's probably best to have at least two very different options at your disposal, so that you can choose which one to use depending on the project (or use both), but I agree 100% with you: if we're talking about musical plasticity and flexibility, SM is very difficult to beat (listen to this little Bach excerpt).


Well... I live with a violinist that plays this type of things all the time, so I'm utterly unconvinced by that example. However, the OT comparison above left me speechless...! OT sounded dreadful to my ears, static, cold and robotic (perhaps the programming wasn't up to the level), but SM, which so far has sounded very synthy to me, sounded so believable that I made my violinist flatmate, who recently performed this piece with a real orchestra and she agreed it was pretty good. I'm going to quote her here since her comments better defined what I felt is wrong with this library:

"Performance is good, but it sounds a bit too perfect as in it feels like every section is only one player as opposed to many. Usually in a string section you have more colours and sounds, the notes have this kind of outer edge, on the sides of the notes. In here (SM) it sounds like you're are just hearing the leader multiplied many times as opposed to say 14 people trying to play together." 

I have in the past made some mockups that had her thoroughly convinced, I've only been able to achieve this using VSL's Dimension Strings, programming each player separately and even using different keyswitches and pitch humanising curves. I would think that this should be possible with SM, since most of it is simulated. Perhaps somebody should try to make a violin section made up of smaller sections playing in unison... I'd like to know if you get phasing and artifacts and whether you get more realistic performance. I would also like to know what is the maximum divisi you can do with one section...

These are the things that are keeping me on the fence.


----------



## Ashermusic

Bollen said:


> \
> 
> "Performance is good, but it sounds a bit too perfect as in it feels like every section is only one player as opposed to many. Usually in a string section you have more colours and sounds, the notes have this kind of outer edge, on the sides of the notes. In here (SM) it sounds like you're are just hearing the leader multiplied many times as opposed to say 14 people trying to play together."



Which is the point I keep making, (ad nauseam, I know, sorry.)

A recording, which is what samples are, of people playing a note together, is never going to really sound like a bunch of players listening and reacting to each other. It may indeed fool many listeners for a short time, but over a lengthier time it isn't going to fool those of us who have worked with real orchestras.

So better to unjust use whatever sounds you find pleasing. If SM end result pleases you, great, I certainly take no issue with it.


----------



## DSmolken

Ashermusic said:


> A recording, which is what samples are, of people playing a note together, is never going to really sound like a bunch of players listening and reacting to each other.


This is one reason why I think emulating sections (or choirs) one person at a time is a good area to focus on. Players listening and reacting to each other is fun and interesting to emulate.


----------



## Vardaro

So far I have only had the time to "noodle". But it is vital to experiment with the various randomisation parameters: scripted random de-tuning, de-syncing etc.

Samplemodeling, Embertone, and Chris Hein _legacy_ solos (not the Extended versions), which can all apply vibrato to non-vib samples, offer scripted ensemble patches: ET from 1 to 8 violins, CH 1 to 5, and SM "small" and "big" sections.
SM uses a 4-violin multi (more samples), the others seem to script from a single violin. I found I could remove 1 or 2 of the multi violins...
All 3 have various randomisations, which are pretty convincing to my practiced ears. I think SM goes furthest in this.

Chris Hein's mammoth String ensembles violin section is only twice as big as the solo violin., sample-wise; SM, four times, but with a smaller solo footprint to start with.

I find the CH tone "grainier" than the others; I like his LFO vibrato the least, indeed he has abandoned non-vib samples in the "extended versions".


I don't find the SM sections less real than OT's: its just a different orchestra! SM sound to me more like the Vienna Phil, where all the string instruments belong to the orchestra, and many of the players studied with their older colleagues... Warm and smooth...

Edit: I have just corrected "VSO" to "LFO"!


----------



## Bollen

DSmolken said:


> This is one reason why I think emulating sections (or choirs) one person at a time is a good area to focus on. Players listening and reacting to each other is fun and interesting to emulate.


This is the future me thinks...


----------



## Brian Nowak

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> yes, we will prolong the early bird period to the end of October. And we will provide free updates improving the product. What we have done so far is the fruit of four years of very hard work. It's a decent product. Not perfect. But perfection is our final aim.



Hey @Giorgio Tommasini - I was recently fortunate enough to have won this product in a giveaway on social media. I am curious if you have any estimate as to when the update will be coming around. If it is timely I believe I will wait to download the product to the updated version. Thanks!


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

Brian Nowak said:


> Hey @Giorgio Tommasini - I was recently fortunate enough to have won this product in a giveaway on social media. I am curious if you have any estimate as to when the update will be coming around. If it is timely I believe I will wait to download the product to the updated version. Thanks!



Hi Brian, congratulations. The update will be quite thorough, including bugfixes, revised samples for the cello(S), new body IRs, and some new features. It will take quite a while. And it will be free. So please proceed and download the current Solo & Ensemble Strings, which is quite nice IMHO. Have fun! 

Giorgio


----------



## DANIELE

I must say that the more I play with this library the more I get better results. It is a great experience, like learning an instrument (obviously not comparable to learn real instruments) and this is why this kind of libraries are so good, they are almost quickly usable but at the same time they are very deep. I can't wait to see what's in the update.


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

Some asked for a walkthrough. Ramiro Gómez Massetti ( https://www.ramirogomez.com.ar/en ) prepared a series of tutorials to accomplish this task. The first episode demonstrates each solo and ensemble instrument, naked and played in real time.


----------



## lychee

Thanks for the video, I think I will give this Library a chance when I will have some money.


----------



## Gene Cornelius

Wow. OK, that's really impressive. I'm eating corvids by the plateful. Looking forward to the followup videos ... besides being a virtuosic player, which obviously helps (required?) (I certainly am not) I'd be very curious to know what settings/parameters were used in the making of this - I'm sure Ramiro will tell all? I can see how, in the right hands, having the ability, nay, responsibility, to control all aspects of the sound/performance/timbre, lead to a very authentic and evocative sound .... if it were dumbed down for people like me, it would be .. well, limited by that. So basically, work harder, it's worth it ... !? 

But again, very impressed, and humbled - thank you!



Giorgio Tommasini said:


> Some asked for a walkthrough. Ramiro Gómez Massetti ( https://www.ramirogomez.com.ar/en ) prepared a series of tutorials to accomplish this task. The first episode demonstrates each solo and ensemble instrument, naked and played in real time.


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

Cristian Labelli performed Ravel's Scherzo using just Samplemodeling Solo Strings. I'd like to know your opinion about. Thanks in advance.


----------



## eli0s

It sounds very good! I can't imagine a sample based library pulling this off as good as this! And the timbre is very nice also! I don't feel the "synthetic" aspect that I was getting on other demos.
My only complain will be the pizzicatos, on repeated notes they sound robotic, as if no round robins where used.
Other than that, this is pushing me towards the "buy" direction, if I only could spend the money!!!


----------



## Bollen

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> Cristian Labelli performed Ravel's Scherzo using just Samplemodeling Solo Strings. I'd like to know your opinion about. Thanks in advance.


For me this has been a total rollercoaster since the beginning. 

- When it first came out I thought it sounded nothing like I was used to from Samplemodelling, it was very artificial and synthy, with none of the usual realism that so characteristic of SM. 

- Then some solo demos appeared which were pretty decent, not enough to buy, but much closer to what I expect from SM. The ensemble however was still poor.

- After that the Beethoven tutorial had me completely sold on the ensemble, but most solo demos that had come out were pretty awful.

- then the other day you posted the videos above and that convinced me that I would not be buying this library. Everything sounded incredibly grainy and synthy (I'll never understand why people insist on using breath controllers, it never sounds right).

But now you bring this new gem to the table and I'm again completely lost as to whether this is a good product or not. So to answer your question, yes! It's great!

I personally think you missed a great opportunity with this library, because since modelling allows you to join and manipulate samples so well, you could have made a huge impact by doing the things that most libraries can't: specific ensemble sizes, full section division, random clusters, etc. And you could have packed them separately to be more affordable for those who are unsure: solo instruments, violins sections, cello sections, etc. In the long run you might make a lot more money if people buy them in chunks.


----------



## Batrawi

So...I pulled the trigger and bought this one. I wasn't really putting high hopes but I knew that worst case scenario I was going to get a 'playdough' strings library which I can enjoy shaping and sketching with at the least... Truth is though, my expectations were exceeded! And unlike other libraries, this one does sound better under your fingers (when you shape it to your taste) than when you would usually hear it in other people's demos !

*Bottom line:*
The library sounds very good as a solo strings library but still needs a lot of work in order to sound like real ensemble. Though the developers have really done a great job so far with the ensemble builder/randomizer engine, and I think it is really a good starting point for the better to come.

*Pros:*
-amazing playability(stating the obvious)
-the sound of the solo instruments is leaning to the natural side despite the technology that is heavily based on modelling (comparing it to AM's strings for example, the tone of this one is indeed a step forward)

*Things that annoy me (bugs ?):*
-vibrato delay: no matter how I increase this delay towards the 127 value , I still randomly get an immediate vibrato with note attacks or legato transitions. Not sure what's causing this to happen or if this control could hiddenly/mistakenly be affected by velocity as well?
-the bow noise works fine with the violin, however when increased with the viola and cello, I start hearing a very slight distortion/growling in the sound of the instruments itself.
-Sometimes the vibrato affects/continues with the release noise/resonance, despite in reality it must immediately stop when lifting the fingers off the strings (I noticed this in the ensemble mode)
-some pizz notes sound very thin as if hair is being plucked as opposed to strings. The pizz articulation is overall very nice though.

*Suggestion:*
I think the main reason why this library can usually sound weird/synthy, is because -in concept- it is like a body with flesh but without bones!..In other words, the sound signature of the instruments may have been captured very well, yet without the natural "dirt" that would accompany it in real life. For example, the only noise layer we have in this library is the bow noise. I think other noise layers(with volume control) could have been added to increase realism. For example:
-finger noise sliding on the string when searching/moving to the next note.
-finger noise tapping/pressing the string against the instrument body at the start of each note.
-maybe including a legato volume control would be nice to have
-etc...
Now someone may think "such tiny things will never be noticed/heard in context". True BUT, these tiny things in reality are an integral part of the context! You do not see the body's bones yet due to its hidden existence, you do see the body's structure/shape. These are the mechanic noises fused with the sonic signature in the real world and therefore should be added back when trying to replicate the instrument in the virtual world IMHO.

Overall, it is really a pleasant library to play and experiment with and I can see the potential of it becoming considerably better with future updates.

Good job SM, I really appreciate the effort done with this one even though I admit I wasn't very optimistic at the first impression.


----------



## Bollen

Batrawi said:


> So...I pulled the trigger and bought this one. I wasn't really putting high hopes but I knew that worst case scenario I was going to get a 'playdough' strings library which I can enjoy shaping and sketching with at the least... Truth is though, my expectations were exceeded! And unlike other libraries, this one does sound better under your fingers (when you shape it to your taste) than when you would usually hear it in other people's demos !
> 
> *Bottom line:*
> The library sounds very good as a solo strings library but still needs a lot of work in order to sound like real ensemble. Though the developers have really done a great job so far with the ensemble builder/randomizer engine, and I think it is really a good starting point for the better to come.
> 
> *Pros:*
> -amazing playability(stating the obvious)
> -the sound of the solo instruments is leaning to the natural side despite the technology that is heavily based on modelling (comparing it to AM's strings for example, the tone of this one is indeed a step forward)
> 
> *Things that annoy me (bugs ?):*
> -vibrato delay: no matter how I increase this delay towards the 127 value , I still randomly get an immediate vibrato with note attacks or legato transitions. Not sure what's causing this to happen or if this control could hiddenly/mistakenly be affected by velocity as well?
> -the bow noise works fine with the violin, however when increased with the viola and cello, I start hearing a very slight distortion/growling in the sound of the instruments itself.
> -Sometimes the vibrato affects/continues with the release noise/resonance, despite in reality it must immediately stop when lifting the fingers off the strings (I noticed this in the ensemble mode)
> -some pizz notes sound very thin as if hair is being plucked as opposed to strings. The pizz articulation is overall very nice though.
> 
> *Suggestion:*
> I think the main reason why this library can usually sound weird/synthy, is because -in concept- it is like a body with flesh but without bones!..In other words, the sound signature of the instruments may have been captured very well, yet without the natural "dirt" that would accompany it in real life. For example, the only noise layer we have in this library is the bow noise. I think other noise layers(with volume control) could have been added to increase realism. For example:
> -finger noise sliding on the string when searching/moving to the next note.
> -finger noise tapping/pressing the string against the instrument body at the start of each note.
> -maybe including a legato volume control would be nice to have
> -etc...
> Now someone may think "such tiny things will never be noticed/heard in context". True BUT, these tiny things in reality are an integral part of the context! You do not see the body's bones yet due to its hidden existence, you do see the body's structure/shape. These are the mechanic noises fused with the sonic signature in the real world and therefore should be added back when trying to replicate the instrument in the virtual world IMHO.
> 
> Overall, it is really a pleasant library to play and experiment with and I can see the potential of it becoming considerably better with future updates.
> 
> Good job SM, I really appreciate the effort done with this one even though I admit I wasn't very optimistic at the first impression.


Thank you for the review @Batrawi, that was actually really informative! I hope you make some demos for us...

If you own Vienna Dimension strings, you could layer their finger noises with SM's, they should provide equal realism since it's about position and fingering.

I really hope the update will include at least some of our suggestions. We'll have to wait and see..


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

eli0s, Bollen, Batrawi,

thanks for taking your time to listen and provide us with your appreciation, criticism and suggestions.

I believe, Bollen, that you drew out the basics for the diagnosis. These instruments are far from perfect, but if appropriately treated, they can yield rewarding results.

We will do our best to take account of your suggestions in the next update. We are working on several bugfixes, a better sounding Cello, selectable off-the-string and on-the-string release, improved bow-change/detaché, randomization on pizzicato and tremolo. All the ensembles will be supplied in two slightly different versions, for better divisi.

Please wait and see......

A technical note concerning Batrawi's reported issue on vibrato delay. The delay works as set by CC23, but is transiently switched off on sudden jumps of CC1, to allow for instantaneous expressive vibrato on climax notes.

All the best,

Giorgio & Peter


----------



## I like music

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> eli0s, Bollen, Batrawi,
> 
> thanks for taking your time to listen and provide us with your appreciation, criticism and suggestions.
> 
> I believe, Bollen, that you drew out the basics for the diagnosis. These instruments are far from perfect, but if appropriately treated, they can yield rewarding results.
> 
> We will do our best to take account of your suggestions in the next update. We are working on several bugfixes, a better sounding Cello, selectable off-the-string and on-the-string release, improved bow-change/detaché, randomization on pizzicato and tremolo. All the ensembles will be supplied in two slightly different versions, for better divisi.
> 
> Please wait and see......
> 
> A technical note concerning Batrawi's reported issue on vibrato delay. The delay works as set by CC23, but is transiently switched off on sudden jumps of CC1, to allow for instantaneous expressive vibrato on climax notes.
> 
> All the best,
> 
> Giorgio & Peter



These products are excellent. While we're giving feedback, there were two points I wanted to add, if it helps from a customer perspective (though I'm not that experienced a musician)

1. I think the bow noise at very low dynamics (at the ensemble and solo level) can be a bit loud I feel, even when this is turned down all the way.

2) It might be the cello, but when doing soft chords with the strings in the low-mid ranges, it can muddy things up just a bit.

3) I feel like the strings _could_ be a bit quieter in the lowest dynamics. There's just a bit of a cliff, but I guess I can do some volume automation here manually.


But generally, fantastic strings. Nearly finished a mockup using them, and they shine when it comes to runs, and also when I'm really pushing out a loud swishing melody. Looking forward to the updates!


----------



## I like music

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> All the ensembles will be supplied in two slightly different versions, for better divisi.



This small thing is going to be an underrated hit. This, more than anything else (apart from Dominus Pro) is what I'm looking forward to.


----------



## José Herring

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> Cristian Labelli performed Ravel's Scherzo using just Samplemodeling Solo Strings. I'd like to know your opinion about. Thanks in advance.


Very lyrical and musical but brutal sounding. Wondering if there is a way to tame it. Or perhaps in the future getting an IR that would improve the timbre of the strings, similar to what LASS has?


----------



## justthere

You know what this library is really good for? Insanely fast runs for animation á la Carl Stalling. That’s why it lives in my template.


----------



## I like music

justthere said:


> You know what this library is really good for? Insanely fast runs for animation á la Carl Stalling. That’s why it lives in my template.



Yes! Right now it is incomparable for quick runs!


----------



## DSmolken

You can do a lot of things with samples which you can't with real musicians, and that's been true since the 90s. But clarity in fast ensemble string runs might be the biggest thing composers really want from that list.

I'll admit - saying clarity in fast ensemble runs is impossible for real musicians is an exaggeration, but it sure isn't easy for a lot of us, and takes more practice and preparation than the conductor or composer will often get out of us in real life. Building an ensemble from samples of individual instruments, like these strings, really is a big advantage over both sampling an entire ensemble at once, and over real players in a lot of real-life scenarios.

So, yeah, quick runs sounding good is huge.


----------



## Batrawi

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> A technical note concerning Batrawi's reported issue on vibrato delay. The delay works as set by CC23, but is transiently switched off on sudden jumps of CC1, to allow for instantaneous expressive vibrato on climax notes.


Thanks Giorgio...So how can I disable CC1's intrusion? or is this something yet to be fixed? Also note that I sometime get immediate vibrato at the very first note I play without touching CC1 or manipulating any dynamics! So it still looks like something that happens randomly without specific rule


----------



## Jonathan Moray

Batrawi said:


> Thanks Giorgio...So how can I disable CC1's intrusion? or is this something yet to be fixed? Also note that I sometime get immediate vibrato at the very first note I play without touching CC1 or manipulating any dynamics!



I don't think he means CC1 as in dynamics, I think he means CC1 as in vibrato; the default controller for vibrato. If you move the assigned vibrator controller it will override the vibrato fade in, which makes sense.

If it's happening without you moving anything, make sure your MIDI controller isn't sending CC data without you touching it, mine does sometimes.


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

Batrawi said:


> Thanks Giorgio...So how can I disable CC1's intrusion? or is this something yet to be fixed? Also note that I sometime get immediate vibrato at the very first note I play without touching CC1 or manipulating any dynamics! So it still looks like something that happens randomly without specific rule



Batrawi,

transient disabling of the vibrato delay should only occur when the derivative of CC1 (linked to vibrato intensity) overcomes a certain threshold. I'll double check if it's properly working and let you know.


----------



## Batrawi

Jonathan Moray said:


> I don't think he means CC1 as in dynamics, I think he means CC1 as in vibrato; the default controller for vibrato. If you move the assigned vibrator controller it will override the vibrato fade in, which makes sense.
> 
> If it's happening without you moving anything, make sure your MIDI controller isn't sending CC data without you touching it, mine does sometimes.


Actually I assign CC1 to my modwheel to control dynamics. So I actually don't have any physical knobs to control the vibrato parameters and I just set them by mouse. Yet I still get this issue randomly


----------



## Jonathan Moray

Batrawi said:


> Actually I assign CC1 to my modwheel to control dynamics. So I actually don't have any physical knobs to control the vibrato parameters and I just set them by mouse. Yet I still get this issue randomly



Yeah, I kinda figured you used CC1 as dynamics that's why I wanted to clarify that it's not always CC1 that interrupt the vibrato fade, but the controller assigned to vibrato.

Anyhow, then that's very odd. It sounds like a bug if it just happens randomly and you've disabled all means to control it from outside of the daw. If you record a phrase does it happen at the same spot every time you play the MIDI back? If it does maybe upload a MIDI file and see if anyone else can replicate it.


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

Batrawi said:


> Actually I assign CC1 to my modwheel to control dynamics. So I actually don't have any physical knobs to control the vibrato parameters and I just set them by mouse. Yet I still get this issue randomly



I strongly suggest to control dynamics with CC11, even if driven by the modwheel. I also suggest to control vibrato intensity by CC1, even if remapped to any other CC. Under these circumstances vibrato delay properly works. You say that in your case vibrato intensity is controlled by mouse. I can thus assume that it is still linked to CC1. This may introduce conflicts, since CC1 controls both dynamics and vibrato intensity. Please try to remap vibrato intensity (drop down menu CC remapping 1) to some non used CC, for example CC50. This should allow driving CC50 by the mouse and solve the problem. Otherwise, please PM me.


----------



## Batrawi

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> I can thus assume that it is still linked to CC1. This may introduce conflicts, since CC1 controls both dynamics and vibrato intensity. Please try to remap vibrato intensity (drop down menu CC remapping 1) to some non used CC, for example CC50. This should allow driving CC50 by the mouse and solve the problem. Otherwise, please PM me.


No it's not the case and I remap all vibrato controls to something that I don't use (CC0). Will PM you.


----------



## I like music

First Contact by Jerry Goldsmith, middle section mocked up by SM Strings. Still a lot to learn on this, and I still need to do a lot of work on the general mixing, but if anyone cared to hear how they strings may sound in a 'cinematic' context, this could be helpful. Simply fed them through Cubase's stock reverb.


----------



## Jonathan Moray

I like music said:


> First Contact by Jerry Goldsmith, middle section mocked up by SM Strings. Still a lot to learn on this, and I still need to do a lot of work on the general mixing, but if anyone cared to hear how they strings may sound in a 'cinematic' context, this could be helpful. Simply fed them through Cubase's stock reverb.




I was just about to ask if anybody had done anything with the library since it's been out for a while now, and here you are.

Really nice, I like it.

There's a few things that I would point out, but nothing major.

Everything sounds rather cohesive, but *I* would put the strings back just a little bit to make them sound like they are more in the section/room, and not on top of the orchestra. This is especially noticeable to me @1:24 where the strings take over the melody. I think either more reverb (especially early reflections), or EQ to take away some of the high end, would work fine. I would go for the EQ in situation since the strings already sound like they are in the same room as the other instruments, just a little too close. Adding more tail reverb could mess up the perception of them being in the same room.

The whole track is missing a bit of bottom, so it's not as full as it could be and a little bit too bright for my taste. This probably contributes to the strings sounding like their on top of the orchestra as well.

Same with the harp run at around 1:24, it sounds like it's not really apart of the orchestra. I would try and add some more early reflections to it maybe. Or, maybe I'm just not a fan of the harp used.

Keep in mind; all of these suggestions are, of course, just my personal preference so if you are happy with the way it sounds, then I'm happy.

Overall I really like it, good job. Hope you post more. And anyone else who's done anything with the library for that matter.


----------



## I like music

Jonathan Moray said:


> I was just about to ask if anybody had done anything with the library since it's been out for a while now, and here you are.
> 
> Really nice, I like it.
> 
> There's a few things that I would point out, but nothing major.
> 
> Everything sounds rather cohesive, but *I* would put the strings back just a little bit to make them sound like they are more in the section/room, and not on top of the orchestra. This is especially noticeable to me @1:24 where the strings take over the melody. I think either more reverb (especially early reflections), or EQ to take away some of the high end, would work fine. I would go for the EQ in situation since the strings already sound like they are in the same room as the other instruments, just a little too close. Adding more tail reverb could mess up the perception of them being in the same room.
> 
> The whole track is missing a bit of bottom, so it's not as full as it could be and a little bit too bright for my taste. This probably contributes to the strings sounding like their on top of the orchestra as well.
> 
> Same with the harp run at around 1:24, it sounds like it's not really apart of the orchestra. I would try and add some more early reflections to it maybe. Or, maybe I'm just not a fan of the harp used.
> 
> Keep in mind; all of these suggestions are, of course, just my personal preference so if you are happy with the way it sounds, then I'm happy.
> 
> Overall I really like it, good job. Hope you post more. And anyone else who's done anything with the library for that matter.



Thanks for the feedback man! And I heard very similar things from one or two other people regarding the bottom end being absent. I can tell you why. I did a huge cut, and I think its because I write in a small cupboard, which meant that without that drastic EQ, all I could hear was the bottom end. Shows the importance of having a good space to work in, doesn't it! I'll definitely go back and look at this specifically.

Regarding strings, thanks again. Good news is I can use Sample Modeling's own placement 'engine' to move the strings back a bit. Currently, my settings have the strings set to as close as possible, so it is good to know that I can give them room to breath!

The harp was an afterthought. I haven't quite figured out how to 'gel' it into the orchestra. Same with my piano. They're giving me major headaches.

If anyone's interested, I've got the full theme mocked up, but I haven't done much tweaking on the start and end sections. Will work on those this week and post the full track. Aaron Venture stuff seems to compliment SM Strings quite well.


----------



## Jonathan Moray

I like music said:


> Thanks for the feedback man! And I heard very similar things from one or two other people regarding the bottom end being absent. I can tell you why. I did a huge cut, and I think its because I write in a small cupboard, which meant that without that drastic EQ, all I could hear was the bottom end. Shows the importance of having a good space to work in, doesn't it! I'll definitely go back and look at this specifically.
> 
> Regarding strings, thanks again. Good news is I can use Sample Modeling's own placement 'engine' to move the strings back a bit. Currently, my settings have the strings set to as close as possible, so it is good to know that I can give them room to breath!
> 
> The harp was an afterthought. I haven't quite figured out how to 'gel' it into the orchestra. Same with my piano. They're giving me major headaches.
> 
> If anyone's interested, I've got the full theme mocked up, but I haven't done much tweaking on the start and end sections. Will work on those this week and post the full track. Aaron Venture stuff seems to compliment SM Strings quite well.



Yes, it does. Sadly, everyone cant afford a good treated space, so we have to make due with what we have. I recently move and now I'm in the worst room I've heard. I'm still waiting to get it somewhat treated, but I will have to be relying on headphones for the foreseeable future. As long as you know your space (even if it's bad) and you have something to reference (good headphones is a good idea) you should still get by nicely. It will just take some time to learn both a new room and a couple of headphones.

I have a close friend who has these amazing Genelec monitors in his studio and he often references his Dr. Dre cans (some of the worst headphones I know) because he knows what the low end is supposed to sound like on them since he's listened to them for a very long time. So even bad gear can be used as a references, and it very often is, even in high end studios, as long as you know the gear and room and you know what you're hearing.

The only way to get better is to stick with it. I looked through the other thread you mention and I agree with what's being said in it. From what I understood you didn't really use the original recording as a reference, just your memory of it. If you want to try and make your mockup sound as real as possible, listening to the original side by side with your mockup is very helpful. I listened to the original and my feedback still stands. Especially with the strings of the original. They are a lot darker and fuller. And the whole orchestra seem to be a tad bit wetter than yours.

Please do post the full mockup when your done with it.


----------



## pierrevigneron

Hello everybody ! I'm french so sorry for my bad english language. As the demos and walktrough i could have eared, i find sm strings very versatil, precise and a global beautiful sound. But i can also ear a certain 'static' sound some of you reffered to. I have a suggestion : does anybody could post a little demo with sm string with binaural panning to simulate decca tree and vst like nls by waves or a tape machine to add a certain randomization. Best regards from france


----------



## rdieters

This video has many good tips, I recommend watching it.


----------



## ch4rles

rdieters said:


> This video has many good tips, I recommend watching it.



Great, thanks a lot. Very appreciated.


----------



## pmcrockett

Version 1.1 is now out. Haven't tried it yet, but the changelog is impressive (copy/pasted from the email):

*What's new in Samplemodeling Solo & Ensemble Strings Update v1.1?*

*Bugfixes.*
The instruments utilize a series of CCs, namely CC12, CC13, CC17 for internal use. These midi controllers were previously unshielded, and could yield unwanted side effects on dynamics and pitch if transmitted from external midi devices such, for example CC13 used by the TEC breath controller. This has been fixed in this update.
*New Cello (Solo & Ensemble)*
The Cello(s) have been completely redesigned, using a new set of samples and IRs, with the main aim of getting rid of some timbral defects, such an overall too nasal sound, and some unpleasantly resonating harmonics.
Take a listen to these demos by Emmanuel Y. Lazzara:
Game of Thrones Theme Song - Cello & Violin Cover
Fires in the Night of Istanbul (Middle Eastern dark cello music)

*On-the-string vs. off- the-string attacks.*
This is a new feature, which has been implemented in all the instruments of the series. One can now select on-the-string attack (based on new marcato samples) by setting CC38 above 64. This CC controls the intensity of this effect. The resulting attacks are more gritty and aggressive, as requested by several users. If CC38 is set below 68, the attack will progressively turn into a spiccato. A pristine off-the-string attack will be obtained by playing a short note (less of 120 ms duration) with velocity above 100. This was previously attainable only if the duration did not exceed 40 ms, which was impractical for live playing.
*On-the-string vs. off- the-string releases.*
This is also a new feature, implemented in all the instruments of the series. Previously, all note offs yielded an off-the-string release. We have added an on-the-string decay, which is produced when CC27 is below 64. The lower the value of CC27, the shorter the decay. A similar principle controls the length of the off-the-string release, which is roughly proportional to CC27 above 64.
*Detaché and Bow Change.*
We made a thorough analysis of real examples of these articulations. Although they may vary enormously, from nearly inaudible to very scratchy, depending on the context, there are some elements which clearly differentiate a detaché from a slurred legato. We improved the reproduction of these articulations, adding and modeling suitable samples, whose intensity is under control of CC38. This controller CC38, therefore, acts on both attacks and bowchanges, making them more or less aggressive. The duration of detaché/bowchange articulation is controlled by the interplay between note-on velocity and CC26. This overall approach yields maximal flexibility and, in our opinion, represents a definite improvement over the first release.
*Ensemble Maker.*
The timing of note on & off is randomized according to logical rules. In this update it has been optimized by increasing the time dispersion of the elements of the ensemble, but reducing it above a certain note-on velocity to preserve the definition of the attacks. The dispersion is also reduced in the presence of pizzicato and col legno.
*Ensemble Size and Vibrato.*
The perceived ensemble size is still controlled by CC95. However, a more precise definition of ensemble vibrato follows. The ensembles have a final vibrato effect which is quite different from single instruments. For CC95 ranging from zero to about 70-80, the final effect will be that of a senza vibrato ensemble. Above this threshold, a slight vibrato will appear. Vibrato in ensemble can by asynchronous (the normal case) or it may have some synchronous elements (something that is more often present in small ensembles), corresponding to a first chair players. Our ensembles are by default exploiting asynchronous vibrato. This means that if one raises CC1, this asynchronous component will be more and more evident. For this reason the synchronous component (CC99) is set to zero by default. If one wants to add a synchronous vibrato, he should increase CC99. In either case, differently from solo instruments, optimal CC19 values will range from zero to about 40. For small ensembles, CC19 may even be set to normal vibrato values, i.e. 60-90. Feel free to experiment.
*Microtuning.*
The previous release used static microtuning. Up to twelve presets could be recalled by simultaneously pressing B-1 and any KS between C0 and B0. The present update adds another new feature for maximum flexibility, namely, dynamic microtuning. If the preset "dynamic" is selected, by simultaneously pressing B-1, the sustain pedal and any note between C0 and B0, the pressed notes will be subject to microtuning. Any combination of detuned note is therefore allowed and switched in real time.
*there are additional small fixes and improvements in this new release.*
You may be unaware of them or you may notice that some notes in some instruments sound better. We did our best to improve the overall sound. It took a while, but we believe this time has yielded improvements you will enjoy.


----------



## I like music

Very exciting! I don't seem to have an email...

Didn't quite understand the ensemble size and vibrato interplay. Is it suggesting that small ensembles simply won't have a Vibrato option? Or that the asynchronous component will be supressed and that to achieve Vibrato on very small ensembles, you'd need to act on the synchronous Vibrato setting (cc99)?


----------



## Waywyn

Brian Nowak said:


> I won these strings in a giveaway. I was waiting for the update to even start messing about with them because to me, they really didn't sound very good at all from the early demos.
> 
> 
> I'm honestly glad I didn't invest any time into trying to learn it. Because the update sounds just as bad. I will give credit where it's due. The expression is good. But that doesn't mean anything at all if the tone and body of the instrument just sounds like something that came out of an old workstation keyboard.
> 
> Any way to sell my license?



I am sorry man, but that wasn't the nicest move, don't you think?

I don't want to speak for Peter and Giorgio here, but I was the one who initiated that giveaway, so I feel like being "in the boat".

It would have been cool to at least speak to the developers about what you didn't like, but publically defaming a company like this, simply sucks! It wasn't even constructive criticism!

Besides that, there were many people drooling to win these strings!

Maybe next time, be at least that patient and learn that you are able to shape the tone and the body too!


----------



## DANIELE

I like music said:


> Very exciting! I don't seem to have an email...
> 
> Didn't quite understand the ensemble size and vibrato interplay. Is it suggesting that small ensembles simply won't have a Vibrato option? Or that the asynchronous component will be supressed and that to achieve Vibrato on very small ensembles, you'd need to act on the synchronous Vibrato setting (cc99)?



Mee too, I was expecting an e-mail about the update but...well...let's update!! I was waiting for this, it seems they improved the library a lot.

I was hoping for a tremolo CC but it seems there isn't here. Well, let's hope for the next patch maybe. Now I'm going to try this update.

Thanks to Giorgio and Peter to bring us this update.


----------



## Brian Nowak

Waywyn said:


> I am sorry man, but that wasn't the nicest move, don't you think?
> 
> I don't want to speak for Peter and Giorgio here, but I was the one who initiated that giveaway, so I feel like being "in the boat".
> 
> It would have been cool to at least speak to the developers about what you didn't like, but publically defaming a company like this, simply sucks! It wasn't even constructive criticism!
> 
> Besides that, there were many people drooling to win these strings!
> 
> Maybe next time, be at least that patient and learn that you are able to shape the tone and the body too!



You know man, you're right. I have been having a real bad week and it got the best of me. In fact, I'll just be returning the serial number to you so you can give it to somebody else.


----------



## Tag

My feedback here as well:

1. The patches seem to use more than twice the RAM than the old v1.0.1 patches. How that?
2. The CPU print is slightly heavier, which I do not like, tbh, since I would like an update to at least stay at the performance as before.
3. I cannot easily compare the patches with the old ones. I have to rename the whole folder and load the project again. Loading old NKM or NKI files (like mentioned in the manual) does not work. This also makes it impossible to load older projects and somehow "dangerous" to move to this version without losing old projects, in a way.
4. I attached a MP3 here. To me the new patches mainly sound weirder in a way. Maybe it's just me, but especially runs are somehow weird. The violin trill is not even usable, unfortunately. The audio demo is violins first and then cello at around 30 seconds. It plays a motif in the old patches and directly after that comes the new patches.

CC38 and CC27 (as mentioned in the update mail) do not have any audible effect here.

Unluckily I will stick to the v1.0.1 and hope for a next update, what a bummer. :(



Edit:
I now also attached the MIDI files here. They are making use of Reaticulate in Reaper to switch to other articulations, by the way. I did not check to re-import and see if everything works, but anyway: the violin trills are already weird enough, imo. And they work without articulation change.


----------



## Bollen

Tag said:


> It plays a motif in the old patches and directly after that comes the new patches


That's weird... Are you saying that the first trill (which sounds quite good and realistic) is from the previous version? And the 2nd trill is the update? Because it sounds terrible and "machine gun"-like...


----------



## Tag

Yes, first one is v1.0.1 and the second trill is v1.1


----------



## Don Cajon

@Tag thanks for the comparison audio file! Would you be able to upload the midi as well so we and the devs can have a look at this?


----------



## Bollen

Tag said:


> Yes, first one is v1.0.1 and the second trill is v1.1


Bizarre... It's almost like they forgot the round robins...🤔

Can we assume that the whole file plays like that? First phrase 1.0 2nd repeated phrase version 1.1?


----------



## DANIELE

I did a very few tries but I was able to perform a good thrill with the violin solo. I also tried some other techniques and I find this new instruments more clear. I also like the new Cello. Did you tried the new attack knob?

I must say I still didn't performed performance analysis and the update process is not so easy, especially for actually running projects. I did a backup of the old one to restore it on the fly if I need to.

If I have some time tomorrow after work I will try to post something but I don't guarantee it. I think for tomorrow there will be many other posts about it anyway.

EDIT

I didn't understand how to preserve settings from the old instruments, I take a snapshot and then I will be able to load it in new instruments, am I right? I save all the snapshot and then...could I delete the old library folder?


----------



## Tag

Don Cajon said:


> @Tag thanks for the comparison audio file! Would you be able to upload the midi as well so we and the devs can have a look at this?



Yeah sorry, MIDI files are a good idea, stupid me. :D I attached them here and I am going to edit my intitial post as well!






Bollen said:


> Bizarre... It's almost like they forgot the round robins...🤔
> 
> Can we assume that the whole file plays like that? First phrase 1.0 2nd repeated phrase version 1.1?


Yes, the whole audio file is "phrase in v1.0.1 and directly after that the same phrase in v1.1".






DANIELE said:


> Did you tried the new attack knob?



Yes, as I already wrote here:



Tag said:


> CC38 and CC27 (as mentioned in the update mail) do not have any audible effect here.






Edit:
I used Reaticulate in Reaper for articulation change in the celli. I did not re-check how the MIDIs are now yet. Still I think the MIDIs could become handy for the demonstration without the program changes already.


----------



## Gene Cornelius

Well holy cow! Awesome job guys, with this update! I can work with this. Not only do all the instruments sound better, but the cello is really fun to play with. As one who complained earlier I can say this is 110% better. THANK YOU. Seriously.

The only issue that I have so far (and is same with SM Horns) is that using TeControl breath controller, I am unable to ramp from no sound to some sound. And then from sound to no sound. There is a cut-on/cut-off. Real instruments do NOT always do this. As real (crappy, but real) cellist, I know this. I can start slow soft bow, barely touching string, so whispering. Same with horn (I play euphonium and trumpet). With the strings, it is that I am hearing sounds like what my old cello teacher despairing of me ever making .. that is, clean start, with nice attack. But not all notes are wanted this way! Same with end of note. Cello bow does not stop contact/sound all at once. If it is the last note heard in a composition, it has to be manually faded, which adds to difficulty of making "real". Needs a little work, this.

Could not find control to change this, and, after commenting on it with SM Horns,(which I love) I suspect that issue is here to stay, sadly. Maybe there's a way to make it happen that I have not found yet.

Other than that: Really a great improvement. Somehow more "body" to all the instruments? The viola is throaty and scratchy and raspy in many right ways, the violin is super fun to play arpeggios and runs, and the basses are super warm and lush, and growly when needed. I have changed nothing else but turn on breath control. Have yet to explore the rest of options and whatnot.


----------



## I like music

Thanks tag. Not heard the examples yet as I'm on my phone.

Does anyone know if it is possible to have both versions running at the same time (so I can just delete the new one if it gives me processor or RAM trouble?) 

What's the best way to structure it so that I can roll back to the old version if need be?


----------



## I like music

Gene Cornelius said:


> Well holy cow! Awesome job guys, with this update! I can work with this. Not only do all the instruments sound better, but the cello is really fun to play with. As one who complained earlier I can say this is 110% better. THANK YOU. Seriously.
> 
> The only issue that I have so far (and is same with SM Horns) is that using TeControl breath controller, I am unable to ramp from no sound to some sound. And then from sound to no sound. There is a cut-on/cut-off. Real instruments do NOT always do this. As real (crappy, but real) cellist, I know this. I can start slow soft bow, barely touching string, so whispering. Same with horn (I play euphonium and trumpet). With the strings, it is that I am hearing sounds like what my old cello teacher despairing of me ever making .. that is, clean start, with nice attack. But not all notes are wanted this way! Same with end of note. Cello bow does not stop contact/sound all at once. If it is the last note heard in a composition, it has to be manually faded, which adds to difficulty of making "real". Needs a little work, this.
> 
> Could not find control to change this, and, after commenting on it with SM Horns,(which I love) I suspect that issue is here to stay, sadly. Maybe there's a way to make it happen that I have not found yet.
> 
> Other than that: Really a great improvement. Somehow more "body" to all the instruments? The viola is throaty and scratchy and raspy in many right ways, the violin is super fun to play arpeggios and runs, and the basses are super warm and lush, and growly when needed. I have changed nothing else but turn on breath control. Have yet to explore the rest of options and whatnot.


Nice to hear this. Are you experiencing the same RAM and processor footprint by the way?


----------



## DANIELE

Tag said:


> Yes, as I already wrote here:



Yeah, sorry, I was very tired and I missed that. Well I can hear very well the effect of attack knob, maybe you did something wrong in the update process.
As I said I did a very few tries but from what I heard I liked this update a lot. I have only to ask if the effect I hear on very long portamentos is right or not, for this I need a cellist. I will post an example of what I mean once I will be at home after work.



Gene Cornelius said:


> Well holy cow! Awesome job guys, with this update! I can work with this. Not only do all the instruments sound better, but the cello is really fun to play with. As one who complained earlier I can say this is 110% better. THANK YOU. Seriously.
> 
> The only issue that I have so far (and is same with SM Horns) is that using TeControl breath controller, I am unable to ramp from no sound to some sound. And then from sound to no sound. There is a cut-on/cut-off. Real instruments do NOT always do this. As real (crappy, but real) cellist, I know this. I can start slow soft bow, barely touching string, so whispering. Same with horn (I play euphonium and trumpet). With the strings, it is that I am hearing sounds like what my old cello teacher despairing of me ever making .. that is, clean start, with nice attack. But not all notes are wanted this way! Same with end of note. Cello bow does not stop contact/sound all at once. If it is the last note heard in a composition, it has to be manually faded, which adds to difficulty of making "real". Needs a little work, this.
> 
> Could not find control to change this, and, after commenting on it with SM Horns,(which I love) I suspect that issue is here to stay, sadly. Maybe there's a way to make it happen that I have not found yet.
> 
> Other than that: Really a great improvement. Somehow more "body" to all the instruments? The viola is throaty and scratchy and raspy in many right ways, the violin is super fun to play arpeggios and runs, and the basses are super warm and lush, and growly when needed. I have changed nothing else but turn on breath control. Have yet to explore the rest of options and whatnot.



The abrupt attack thing, from what I know and from what I could understand (I'm an engineer), is part of how the algorithm work. I obviously don't know how they did it but I studied something similar when I was at university. The algorithm has to preview in some way what you will do and the first dynamic levels are used for this purpose. Actually I think there's no solution to this, the only one solution maybe is to use an high resolution midi protocol (like 14bit one or maybe midi 2.0) where you could do the same thing but with very little discrete dynamic intervals that could result in a realistic behavior for players ears.

Aaron Venture libraries for example use a little different approach but the "issue" is the same. With those libraries even at 0 dynamics you hear a pianissimo effect so you already start with a little sound that you have to tune manually after you recorded the performance if you want to start with silence.

I hope I explained it well enough.


----------



## I like music

DANIELE said:


> Yeah, sorry, I was very tired and I missed that. Well I can hear very well the effect of attack knob, maybe you did something wrong in the update process.
> As I said I did a very few tries but from what I heard I liked this update a lot. I have only to ask if the effect I hear on very long portamentos is right or not, for this I need a cellist. I will post an example of what I mean once I will be at home after work.
> 
> 
> 
> The abrupt attack thing, from what I know and from what I could understand (I'm an engineer), is part of how the algorithm work. I obviously don't know how they did it but I studied something similar when I was at university. The algorithm has to preview in some way what you will do and the first dynamic levels are used for this purpose. Actually I think there's no solution to this, the only one solution maybe is to use an high resolution midi protocol (like 14bit one or maybe midi 2.0) where you could do the same thing but with very little discrete dynamic intervals that could result in a realistic behavior for players ears.
> 
> Aaron Venture libraries for example use a little different approach but the "issue" is the same. With those libraries even at 0 dynamics you hear a pianissimo effect so you already start with a little sound that you have to tune manually after you recorded the performance if you want to start with silence.
> 
> I hope I explained it well enough.


Hey man. Did you find that ram requirements went up? Or processor?


----------



## Erik

@Tag. Thanks for sharing your files.

Herewith, based on your test cello midi (which I customized a little bit here and there) another mp3. Used Cello 6s, version 1.1., placement SPAT. No further EQ.


----------



## DANIELE

I like music said:


> Hey man. Did you find that ram requirements went up? Or processor?



I still didn't look at that, I will do this evening.


----------



## richhickey

Great update! It sounds much better.

I am having one problem: for the viola only (solo) - using the sustain pedal activates detache but also causes the notes to keep ringing polyphonically. Using the keyswitch works as expected monophonically. The other solo instrument's detaches work fine (mono) with the sustain pedal.

I also find it strange that on-string attack is CC38 > 64, while on-string release/decay is CC27 < 64, and vice-versa for off-string. Seems like it would be easier to move them in the same direction to move on/off string.


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

Thanks Tag, and all others discussing the topic of defective ensemble trills. You're right. We found a coding error which under certain circumstances provokes this issue. A fix will be available soon. Sorry for the inconvenience.


----------



## DANIELE

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> Thanks Tag, and all others discussing the topic of defective ensemble trills. You're right. We found a coding error which under certain circumstances provokes this issue. A fix will be available soon. Sorry for the inconvenience.



So let's wait for this update to make this step.


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

richhickey said:


> Great update! It sounds much better.
> 
> I am having one problem: for the viola only (solo) - using the sustain pedal activates detache but also causes the notes to keep ringing polyphonically. Using the keyswitch works as expected monophonically. The other solo instrument's detaches work fine (mono) with the sustain pedal.
> 
> I also find it strange that on-string attack is CC38 > 64, while on-string release/decay is CC27 < 64, and vice-versa for off-string. Seems like it would be easier to move them in the same direction to move on/off string.



Richhikey, please set in "Instrument Options->Controller->MIDI Controller #64 (Sustain Pedal) acts as -> CC only. And you're done.

CC38 controls the roughness and the intensity of the attack, the higher the stronger. CC27 acts on the duration of either off-the-string release (above 64) or the decay of on-the-string release. The lower, the shorter.


----------



## I like music

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> Richhikey, please set in "Instrument Options->Controller->MIDI Controller #64 (Sustain Pedal) acts as -> CC only. And you're done.
> 
> CC38 controls the roughness and the intensity of the attack, the higher the stronger. CC27 acts on the duration of either off-the-string release (above 64) or the decay of on-the-string release. The lower, the shorter.


Hi Giorgio, 

Looking forward to getting the update. 

A general question, if you would not mind. If I want more extreme panning of the strings (more than what to can hear using your pan feature) do you see any fundamental issues with me using something like panagement or not?

Finally, i may have imagined it, but are there any plans to create any divisi sections (with sufficient randomisation that we can write overlapping and meandering lines?

Oh, and is the RAM/CPU load on the updates equal to the previous version?


----------



## DANIELE

Here is the strange glissando effects I was talking about in an previous post. It is a pretty rare articulation but I found that with very long portamentos (attack knob to max and velocity to min) I heard a "cut-off" like sound during the glissando effect.

As this articulation is pretty rare I didn't find a real life example so I would like to know from a cellist if it sounds right or not, you can hear it even in shorter glissandos but it is less present.

This example is taken from version 1.0.1 but you can hear it in 1.1 too.

Thank you.


----------



## richhickey

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> Richhikey, please set in "Instrument Options->Controller->MIDI Controller #64 (Sustain Pedal) acts as -> CC only. And you're done.



That works, thanks!



Giorgio Tommasini said:


> CC38 controls the roughness and the intensity of the attack, the higher the stronger. CC27 acts on the duration of either off-the-string release (above 64) or the decay of on-the-string release. The lower, the shorter.



I get the sound parameter space intentions, nevertheless getting spiccato means setting two controllers in opposite directions, ditto on-string. It seems like a programming answer, not a performance/instrument-emulation answer. I can deal with it, but... shrug


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

richhickey said:


> I get the sound parameter space intentions, nevertheless getting spiccato means setting two controllers in opposite directions, ditto on-string. It seems like a programming answer, not a performance/instrument-emulation answer. I can deal with it, but... shrug



It is a programming answer  Seriously, a spiccato articulation will be outputted at whatever value of CC27 for velocities above 100 and note durations < 120 msec. So you don't need to bother about transiently reducing CC27. CC38 can be used to make this "spiccato" more or less aggressive. Reducing CC38 to zero will produce a pure spiccato articulation. Using a single controller.


----------



## DANIELE

Ehi Giorgio, I'm thinking of renaming all the instruments by removing the version numer for granting seamless future updates. If I do this, after the update should I reload the instruments in kontakt even if it should load the new ones?

I mean, if I have to reload them anyway then it is useless to rename the instruments and it is better to follow the snapshot procedure.

Thank you.


----------



## Tag

I like music said:


> Oh, and is the RAM/CPU load on the updates equal to the previous version?



In case you might have overlooked what I wrote: on my site the update seems to use slightly more CPU and more than twice the RAM.


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

DANIELE said:


> Ehi Giorgio, I'm thinking of renaming all the instruments by removing the version numer for granting seamless future updates. If I do this, after the update should I reload the instruments in kontakt even if it should load the new ones?
> 
> I mean, if I have to reload them anyway then it is useless to rename the instruments and it is better to follow the snapshot procedure.
> 
> Thank you.


Daniele,

what we could ascertain is that the snapshots, if saved from the "old" solo instruments and copied to the appropriate folder, can be imported into the "new" instruments, even if some parameters e.g. CC38 are different. What we know is that, at least theoretically, they cannot be used with multis. The problem is under evaluation for a workaround. Perhaps expert Kontakt users might help.


----------



## DANIELE

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> Daniele,
> 
> what we could ascertain is that the snapshots, if saved from the "old" solo instruments and copied to the appropriate folder, can be imported into the "new" instruments, even if some parameters e.g. CC38 are different. What we know is that, at least theoretically, they cannot be used with multis. The problem is under evaluation for a workaround. Perhaps expert Kontakt users might help.



Ok, thank you Giorgio, I'll see what I can do. Maybe I'll keep the two versions separate to keep my actual projects alive without needing to update all of them.


----------



## I like music

Tag said:


> In case you might have overlooked what I wrote: on my site the update seems to use slightly more CPU and more than twice the RAM.



Hey! Yes, this is what made me ask the question as I don't want to update if it'll do that to my RAM, since I just don't have enough to support that in my template!


----------



## DANIELE

I like music said:


> Hey man. Did you find that ram requirements went up? Or processor?



I did a fast try using violin solo.

With the old one I have 195.86 MB of ram occupied, with the new one I have 210.95 MB occupied.

About the CPU the new one seems to be a 0.10 % heavier than the old one.


----------



## I like music

DANIELE said:


> I did a fast try using violin solo.
> 
> With the old one I have 195.86 MB of ram occupied, with the new one I have 210.95 MB occupied.
> 
> About the CPU the new one seems to be a 0.10 % heavier than the old one.


Thank you mate. Really appreciate it!


----------



## DANIELE

DANIELE said:


> I did a fast try using violin solo.
> 
> With the old one I have 195.86 MB of ram occupied, with the new one I have 210.95 MB occupied.
> 
> About the CPU the new one seems to be a 0.10 % heavier than the old one.



I have to fix the instance about the CPU, the use is pretty much the same on both the old and the new one. I forgot the reverb on in the new one and this is why it was a little heavier than the old one.


----------



## DANIELE

I must say I love so much cello solo, the sound is great comparing to the first one.

I'm trying cello ensembles now and I must say that the ram occupied it is almost doubled but the CPU is the same as before.

I did a little test with short notes and I must say two things:

1. I like the sound of the update the most;

2. The short notes are more distinct in the old version. I the new one seems a little messy (maybe I'm doing something wrong with settings).

I recorded the little test and in the second repetition I brought the velocity almost at the maximum level, by doing this I felt the notes became more distinct that in the first repetition. You will hear v 1.0.1 before and 1.1 after.

I will study better the manual to understand if I'm doing something wrong. Any useful comment is well accepted.


----------



## DANIELE

I did another try with the same settings on both (and attack knob at full 0 in v1.1). The example posted before was with the attack knob at 100%.

@Giorgio Tommasini is this a bug or did you want it to be like this? I love the sound of the new one but it seems to have some problems on short notes. Maybe it is related to the thrill issue.


----------



## DANIELE

Here I did a third test, I shortened the notes a bit more and I slowed down tempo to 80 bpm and then 60 bpm (the first two are at 120 bpm) and the effect is more present, is there someone else that could do the same test with a spiccato and tell me if it's me doing something wrong? Thank you.

EDIT

The "Col Legno" articulation still needs some work to avoid the machine gun effect and I'm not able to play it a very low dynamics.


----------



## I like music

DANIELE said:


> I must say I love so much cello solo, the sound is great comparing to the first one.
> 
> I'm trying cello ensembles now and I must say that the ram occupied it is almost doubled but the CPU is the same as before.
> 
> I did a little test with short notes and I must say two things:
> 
> 1. I like the sound of the update the most;
> 
> 2. The short notes are more distinct in the old version. I the new one seems a little messy (maybe I'm doing something wrong with settings).
> 
> I recorded the little test and in the second repetition I brought the velocity almost at the maximum level, by doing this I felt the notes became more distinct that in the first repetition. You will hear v 1.0.1 before and 1.1 after.
> 
> I will study better the manual to understand if I'm doing something wrong. Any useful comment is well accepted.


Still on my phone so don't want to listen to this on crappy speakers. So ram increase doubled only on Cello ensemble or on other ensembles too?


----------



## DANIELE

I like music said:


> Still on my phone so don't want to listen to this on crappy speakers. So ram increase doubled only on Cello ensemble or on other ensembles too?



I didn't have time to look at this. I will do this evening, I will keep testing.


----------



## Tag

Regarding the RAM usage: I saw it on all and tested in detail with the violins:

Old violin solo: 195 mb in Kontakt, while Windows Taskmanager says 741 mb (probably the Kontakt instance as well)

Old violin ensemble: 190 mb in Kontakt, while 828 mb in Taskmanager

New violin solo: 210 in Kontakt, while 760 mb in Taskmanager

New violin ensemble: 740 mb in Kontakt, while 1400 mb in Taskmanager.


To me it really looks like there is something wrong with the ensemble patches.


Regarding my old posts: I absolutely did not test the solo strings in detail, since I simply barely use them, tbh.


----------



## DANIELE

I tested out violins ENS too and I confirm what Tag has written up here. No problems with the CPU.

I confirm the short notes problems I posted before with violins too. I don't know if I'm doing something wrong but I'm hearing a bouncing like effect, like a sort of measured tremolo. Short notes are more distinct in the old version of the library.

I hope Giorgio or Peter could clarify something about this.

In the mean time someone let me know if he is experiencing the same issue, I tried without Reverbs or other plugins and I have the same "wrong" effect.


----------



## Tag

In the Samplemodeling forums they already wrote that a fix is on the way.


----------



## I like music

DANIELE said:


> I tested out violins ENS too and I confirm what Tag has written up here. No problems with the CPU.
> 
> I confirm the short notes problems I posted before with violins too. I don't know if I'm doing something wrong but I'm hearing a bouncing like effect, like a sort of measured tremolo. Short notes are more distinct in the old version of the library.
> 
> I hope Giorgio or Peter could clarify something about this.
> 
> In the mean time someone let me know if he is experiencing the same issue, I tried without Reverbs or other plugins and I have the same "wrong" effect.



Recently had a baby girl which is why I havent yet had the time to test this out! Or even download it yet. 

DANIELE, are you able to have both old and new instruments or does the new one replace the old one? 

And you're saying that the ensemble RAM doubles on the new version (not just for Cello but also for violins?) 

I hope the team releases and update video to help people navigate the functionality so that we're not using it the wrong way!

EDIT: ignore my RAM question!


----------



## I like music

Tag said:


> Regarding the RAM usage: I saw it on all and tested in detail with the violins:
> 
> Old violin solo: 195 mb in Kontakt, while Windows Taskmanager says 741 mb (probably the Kontakt instance as well)
> 
> Old violin ensemble: 190 mb in Kontakt, while 828 mb in Taskmanager
> 
> New violin solo: 210 in Kontakt, while 760 mb in Taskmanager
> 
> New violin ensemble: 740 mb in Kontakt, while 1400 mb in Taskmanager.
> 
> 
> To me it really looks like there is something wrong with the ensemble patches.
> 
> 
> Regarding my old posts: I absolutely did not test the solo strings in detail, since I simply barely use them, tbh.



Ah, I missed this post. Thanks for the detail.


----------



## DANIELE

I like music said:


> Recently had a baby girl which is why I havent yet had the time to test this out! Or even download it yet.
> 
> DANIELE, are you able to have both old and new instruments or does the new one replace the old one?
> 
> And you're saying that the ensemble RAM doubles on the new version (not just for Cello but also for violins?)
> 
> I hope the team releases and update video to help people navigate the functionality so that we're not using it the wrong way!
> 
> EDIT: ignore my RAM question!



I put the 1.1 in a differently named folder and by doing this I'm able to load both the versions, like they are two libraries.



Tag said:


> In the Samplemodeling forums they already wrote that a fix is on the way.



Damn, why didn't I check there? I hope they will fix short notes aswell, they said that the patch is already done, they are waiting for NI to launch the new ensembles. Solo seems to have no problems right now, they sound great!

I'll wait for the new patch. Maybe I will point the short notes problem there.


----------



## I like music

Hi @Giorgio Tommasini - I think I saw that a release was due start of this week, somewhere. Is that the plan so far? And if so, is it better simply to wait for the fix and then download 1.1x or is the fix a small addition of some sort (meaning I can already download 1.1 and simply wait for the fix to arrive)?

Thanks!


----------



## DANIELE

I like music said:


> Hi @Giorgio Tommasini - I think I saw that a release was due start of this week, somewhere. Is that the plan so far? And if so, is it better simply to wait for the fix and then download 1.1x or is the fix a small addition of some sort (meaning I can already download 1.1 and simply wait for the fix to arrive)?
> 
> Thanks!



If you listened to some of the files we posted you could hear that there are some problems with the new ensembles (the solos are in good shape) so I think you should wait for the fix to come out.
It should arrives this week as they said.
The new cello solo is great, I love it but the ensembles has some problems and need to be fixed in order to be used without issues.


----------



## Vardaro

I have v1.0.1 and v1.1 in neighbouring folders. The Libraries tag is set for v1.1. I can use either version from the Files tab.
Comparing the solo cellos side by side, the new one is richer and warmer.
I find the new viola richer, less nasal but harsher over its whole range, rather than only on the top string: easy to sweeten with EQ.
I haven't heard any change in solo violin.

I haven't yet played with the ensembles nor the solo bass.


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

I like music said:


> Hi @Giorgio Tommasini - I think I saw that a release was due start of this week, somewhere. Is that the plan so far? And if so, is it better simply to wait for the fix and then download 1.1x or is the fix a small addition of some sort (meaning I can already download 1.1 and simply wait for the fix to arrive)?
> 
> Thanks!



You may wait if you don't mind. I hope NI will provide us with the working fixed ensembles in a couple of days.


----------



## I like music

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> You may wait if you don't mind. I hope NI will provide us with the working fixed ensembles in a couple of days.



Thank you. So very much looking forward to it. Not to say the strings already aren't amazing! But this will be a cherry on top.


----------



## I like music

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> You may wait if you don't mind. I hope NI will provide us with the working fixed ensembles in a couple of days.



Oh and while I have you in front of your machine I had a question. I'm away from mine for a day but I wanted to ask about two things:

1) The dentune setting on the attacks. Does that apply only to detached notes or would you hear a detuned affect on legato too? And if the latter, I assume it would be handy in a fast run? 

2) does cc64/rebow work even if notes are overlapped or just on detached ones? I ask because I realise that even though I use the function a lot, I've never tried it on connected notes... 

Thanks!


----------



## DANIELE

Fixed ensemble patches are available!


----------



## I like music

DANIELE said:


> Fixed ensemble patches are available!


How do you know? Accessible from the 1.1 link they had put up on their website?


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

from the newsletters, sent to all those who performed an update these days.


----------



## I like music

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> from the newsletters, sent to all those who performed an update these days.


I see. For those of us who didn't perform the update, I'm assuming that the original update link on the product announcement page is the one I should follow?


----------



## Tag

Due to the upload limit of 5 files, I will split my posts. I also did not the best check, tbh. First the violins:

The new ones sound a bit less wet, which I like. The RAM usage is now nearly the same as in the previous version. Also the CPU usage is aaalmost the same - unfortunatley a bit higher. I really would likle to see CPU optimization in updates, though. The pizz are the same, while I think they should be louder in volume or at least controllable.

Biggest minus: no backwards compability. Projects made with the previous version won't be able to load or even crash Reaper. Why that?


----------



## Tag

Now the celli (I did not more tests, sorry):

I (personally!) do not like the new sound. The old ones sound much more lyrical to me. Also the had much more bite. I alos attached some tests with the new attack knob (turned down to 0 and up to 127). On 127 it almost can be aggressive as in the old version, but not that much, in my opinion. What a bummer! The pizz and col legno are again just the same patches and samples as in the old version and a bit too low in volume as I already wrote some months ago in the SM forums. CPU und RAM are ok, while CPU usage is slightly higher in the new version as well.

The only thing I like about the new patches: the tremolo seems to be more connected through a played line.

Update 2021:
I changed some words to show that this is my *personal* opinion!


----------



## Fa

Tag said:


> Now the celli (I did not more tests, sorry):
> 
> I do not like the new sound. The old ones sound much more lyrical to me. Also the had much more bite. I alos attached some tests with the new attack knob (turned down to 0 and up to 127). On 127 it almost can be aggressive as in the old version, but not that much, in my opinion. What a bummer! The pizz and col legno are again just the same patches and samples as in the old version and a bit too low in volume as I already wrote some months ago in the SM forums. CPU und RAM are ok, while CPU usage is slightly higher in the new version as well.
> 
> The only thing I like about the new patches: the tremolo seems to be more connected through a played line.
> 
> I am not sure, if I will stick to this update, or still use the previous version due to the mentioned points AND the big problem with the compability lack ... I would be happy if this could be fixed somehow.



Well, I was surprised by your post because I had an almost opposite opinion about Cellos sound: it's definitely a matter of subjective taste by the way, then what is not surprising is we do have different ideas  

in my opinion the new Cello solo is really good, while the previous wasn't at the level of the other solos yet. The Celli ensemble were already good, but the new ones offer a better and uniform sound palette.

In general (not just for cellos but the whole package) what I really like is the very different IRs that are creating more lyrical or more "classical" sound, and the improved control on size and expressive vibrato.

A point that I think important to consider is that (maybe obvious for advanced users, perhaps less for "first-time" users) the "default" is just an audition purpose basic patch: the real application of the instruments being using the dry version, and pick the ambience and IRs you like or you need in your project of course.

About attacks you are right, but it's considered a feature: the aggressive one being no longer by default, but under user control, being modulated by cc38 as off-the-string and on-the string, more or less aggressive according the controller value. The old one were in my opinion sharp, but less natural of the new one (based on more accurate samples choice and modeling). I like the sound of the new one, even if it ask for a little additional care with cc38.


----------



## I like music

I cannot re-assign Vibrato Intensity to any other controller. In the previous version I could do this, but it somehow only responds to CC1. Is anyone else seeing this? All other controllers can be re-assigned but this one is somehow stuck. I'm hoping we aren't stuck with the mod-wheel being used for vibrato, as I have modwheel set to dynamics in everything in my template. Any help appreciated!


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

I like music said:


> I cannot re-assign Vibrato Intensity to any other controller. In the previous version I could do this, but it somehow only responds to CC1. Is anyone else seeing this? All other controllers can be re-assigned but this one is somehow stuck. I'm hoping we aren't stuck with the mod-wheel being used for vibrato, as I have modwheel set to dynamics in everything in my template. Any help appreciated!



I like music,

it does. In the attachments you will see Vibrato Intensity assigned to (for example) CC55. I tested it on both solo and ensemble instruments, and it's perfectly working.

Best,

Giorgio


----------



## I like music

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> I like music,
> 
> it does. In the attachments you will see Vibrato Intensity assigned to (for example) CC55. I tested it on both solo and ensemble instruments, and it's perfectly working.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Giorgio



Thanks Giorgio. How very odd! No matter what I assign to Vibrato Intensity, it ends up affecting the dynamics. Perhaps a bad install of some kind! Good to know that the option wasn't removed however.

PS Cello sounding much nicer :D


----------



## Fa

I like music said:


> Thanks Giorgio. How very odd! No matter what I assign to Vibrato Intensity, it ends up affecting the dynamics. Perhaps a bad install of some kind! Good to know that the option wasn't removed however.
> 
> PS Cello sounding much nicer :D



I also don't have the problem on my system: being cc1 very often used by other libraries for dynamic, did you check if your keyboard/controller or Kontakt has some former association (e.g. cc1 to cc11 you were using in the past) still active?


----------



## I like music

Fa said:


> I also don't have the problem on my system: being cc1 very often used by other libraries for dynamic, did you check if your keyboard/controller or Kontakt has some former association (e.g. cc1 to cc11 you were using in the past) still active?



Thanks! I did check. In fact, the pervious version of SM strings worked perfectly in this regard. I think I didn't follow install instructions properly 

Lets hope I can fix it, so I can get writing!

btw I had asked a previous question to which I wasn't sure of the answer. Does attack detuning only work on detached notes or does that CC also affect transition/legato behaviour (e.g. more randomness at the point that the legato is happening)?


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

I like music said:


> Thanks! I did check. In fact, the pervious version of SM strings worked perfectly in this regard. I think I didn't follow install instructions properly
> 
> Lets hope I can fix it, so I can get writing!
> 
> btw I had asked a previous question to which I wasn't sure of the answer. Does attack detuning only work on detached notes or does that CC also affect transition/legato behaviour (e.g. more randomness at the point that the legato is happening)?



Attack detuning affects each new note, that is, both staccato and legato notes.

Giorgio


----------



## LHall

I must say I love the update and especially love the new cello sounds. Much more realistic and lyrical sounding to my ears. Here's a short snippet of me just noodling on the solo cello. This is the patch straight out of the box and all played live.


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

I like music said:


> Thanks! I did check. In fact, the pervious version of SM strings worked perfectly in this regard. I think I didn't follow install instructions properly
> 
> Lets hope I can fix it, so I can get writing!



Even in case one assigns the dynamics to CC1 and vibrato intensity to any other CC (like CC55 in the attached example), it's perfectly working.

Best,

Giorgio


----------



## I like music

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> Even in case one assigns the dynamics to CC1 and vibrato intensity to any other CC (like CC55 in the attached example), it's perfectly working.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Giorgio


That's how I have it set up. Will try a reinstall and see if that helps! Thanks!


----------



## DANIELE

I like music said:


> I cannot re-assign Vibrato Intensity to any other controller. In the previous version I could do this, but it somehow only responds to CC1. Is anyone else seeing this? All other controllers can be re-assigned but this one is somehow stuck. I'm hoping we aren't stuck with the mod-wheel being used for vibrato, as I have modwheel set to dynamics in everything in my template. Any help appreciated!



I did the exact opposite, I converted everything to CC2 for dynamics for the entire template, I used a midi mapper so I hadn't to edit the instruments itself.

I use for the most part BC compatible libraries (full playalbe ones) so I did this.


----------



## I like music

DANIELE said:


> I did the exact opposite, I converted everything to CC2 for dynamics for the entire template, I used a midi mapper so I hadn't to edit the instruments itself.
> 
> I use for the most part BC compatible libraries (full playalbe ones) so I did this.



Might go the midi mapping route since there are some libraries of mine that don't give me an option in the interface to tweak this.


----------



## DANIELE

I like music said:


> Might go the midi mapping route since there are some libraries of mine that don't give me an option in the interface to tweak this.



Yeah, it is the best route. The fastest way to unify all your libraries under the same CC configuration.

It especially useful to those libraries that get often updates, by using it you don't have to reconfigure your favorite controllers every time you need to update.


----------



## DANIELE

Does someone have problems with viola solo and sustain pedal? Could someone try to use it to trigger bow-change or detachè and let me know if for you it is working right?

Thank you.


----------



## richhickey

DANIELE said:


> Do someone have problems with viola solo and sustain pedal? Could someone try to use it to trigger bow-change or detachè and let me know if for you it is working right?
> 
> Thank you.



I had that problem and Giorgio answered here:






Samplemodeling Solo & Ensemble Strings Released


@Tag thanks for the comparison audio file! Would you be able to upload the midi as well so we and the devs can have a look at this? Yeah sorry, MIDI files are a good idea, stupid me. :D I attached them here and I am going to edit my intitial post as well! Bizarre... It's almost like they...




vi-control.net


----------



## DANIELE

richhickey said:


> I had that problem and Giorgio answered here:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Samplemodeling Solo & Ensemble Strings Released
> 
> 
> @Tag thanks for the comparison audio file! Would you be able to upload the midi as well so we and the devs can have a look at this? Yeah sorry, MIDI files are a good idea, stupid me. :D I attached them here and I am going to edit my intitial post as well! Bizarre... It's almost like they...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> vi-control.net



Oh sorry, I didn't remember that, thank you for pointing this at me.


----------



## Tag

Update in my issue:

1. The "I cannot hear"-thing was due to the missing re-mapping of the "Volume" CC, which I overlooked on the remapping page 4. This might be a GUI bug: the volume remapping is on the upper left, instead of the lower right!

2. Old projects have to be loaded and the patches have to be re-loaded by the user to make the old project "work again".


----------



## lychee

Hello.

I have no more doubts about the power of this virtual instrument since the first demo made by Cristian Labelli.
Samplemodeling has created a new Youtube channel where new music is in demo.
The sound seems super realistic from my point of view (even if I'm not an expert in strings).


----------



## servandus

The update is just fantastic. A lot of issues related to the attack and release of different off-the-string and on-the-string bowings have been adressed, if not completely solved. The attitude that Giorgio and Peter have as developers, listening to every complain and suggestion from the users with utmost care and objectivity (which is not always easy, as the library is their baby, so to say), can not lead to anything but a superb product.


----------



## DANIELE

As I'm not a strings player I'd like to ask to someone more expert than me how I should use overtones to gain a more realistic performance.

Do I have to use them more in solo playing or in ensemble playing?

Do I have to use it during transients between notes?

Etc...

Thank you.


----------



## servandus

Those overtones are usually produced in moderate to fast detaché (and also legato) bowings due mainly to brief "incongruencies" (sorry for my English, I can't find a better word) between bow pressure and bow speed. If you listen carefully to movements like the presto in Bach g minor sonata for example, you can clearly hear a lot of them.




I'd say the use of the overtone controller is probably more effective in solo mockups than in ensemble, just because the solo sound is naked, and all those sonic artifacts are more easily and clearly audible.

Hope that helps


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

lychee,

thank you very much for the heads-up, and your appreciation.

Samplemodeling opened today a dedicated channel on youtube:









SampleModeling


SAMPLEMODELING - OFFICIAL CHANNEL Samplers and synthesizers have been for decades the cornerstones of virtual music. The virtues and drawbacks of each approa...




www.youtube.com






Here below the working links to some demos of SM Solo & Ensemble Strings v. 1.1:










All the best,

Giorgio


----------



## I like music

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> lychee,
> 
> thank you very much for the heads-up, and your appreciation.
> 
> Samplemodeling opened today a dedicated channel on youtube:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SampleModeling
> 
> 
> SAMPLEMODELING - OFFICIAL CHANNEL Samplers and synthesizers have been for decades the cornerstones of virtual music. The virtues and drawbacks of each approa...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.youtube.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here below the working links to some demos of SM Solo & Ensemble Strings v. 1.1:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All the best,
> 
> Giorgio




Wonderful! I notice that a lot of the videos show a fairly overt use of the timbral shaping function. Which CC exactly is that, and what effect is it having in this scenario? Can't quite work out if it is affecting all 3 subgroups or something else?


----------



## DANIELE

servandus said:


> Those overtones are usually produced in moderate to fast detaché (and also legato) bowings due mainly to brief "incongruencies" (sorry for my English, I can't find a better word) between bow pressure and bow speed. If you listen carefully to movements like the presto in Bach g minor sonata for example, you can clearly hear a lot of them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'd say the use of the overtone controller is probably more effective in solo mockups than in ensemble, just because the solo sound is naked, and all those sonic artifacts are more easily and clearly audible.
> 
> Hope that helps




Thank you so much Servandus. Very useful answer.



I like music said:


> Wonderful! I notice that a lot of the videos show a fairly overt use of the timbral shaping function. Which CC exactly is that, and what effect is it having in this scenario? Can't quite work out if it is affecting all 3 subgroups or something else?



I noticed that too, I quote the question as I'm also curious about it.


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

I like music said:


> Wonderful! I notice that a lot of the videos show a fairly overt use of the timbral shaping function. Which CC exactly is that, and what effect is it having in this scenario? Can't quite work out if it is affecting all 3 subgroups or something else?



I like music,

it's a bit complicated to summarize this feature in a post. Basically, up to three harmonics (from 1 to 10) (or three groups of harmonics) can be acted upon, either statically, by setting the timbral shaper bars to positive or negative values (+/-6 dB), or dynamically, first selecting the bars by minimally displacing them from the centerline. In the latter case the intensity of the effect is under control of CC91, CC92, CC93 for the first, second and third selected harmonics (or group of harmonics). A detailed description of the timbral shaper can be found at pages 26-29 of the User Manual SM Strings, v. 1.1.


----------



## I like music

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> I like music,
> 
> it's a bit complicated to summarize this feature in a post. Basically, up to three harmonics (from 1 to 10) (or three groups of harmonics) can be acted upon, either statically, by setting the timbral shaper bars to positive or negative values (+/-6 dB), or dynamically, first selecting the bars by minimally displacing them from the centerline. In the latter case the intensity of the effect is under control of CC91, CC92, CC93 for the first, second and third selected harmonics (or group of harmonics). A detailed description of the timbral shaper can be found at pages 26-29 of the User Manual SM Strings, v. 1.1.



Thanks! Yep, it is something I plan on messing with. However, I was wondering if there was a rough guide on what the general affect is if we act on the different harmonic groups (eg do we get a more nasal quality if we raise third group of harmonics etc?) 

I ask this because I feel like it could be a rabbit hole where my trial and error usually results in error since I'm unfamiliar with what the general affect might be. That said, yes, I know there are some rough guidelines in the manual. Just curious about whether someone might talk about the sonic affect of acting on the different groups.

In any case, good luck with the new channel and I hope to see more stuff on there!


----------



## Vardaro

servandus, I have only just realised that your example is frrom the magnificent Grumiaux recording, not from SM strings...


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

Vardaro said:


> servandus, I have only just realised that your example is frrom the magnificent Grumiaux recording, not from SM strings...



Not yet. Happy about that.


----------



## servandus

Vardaro said:


> servandus, I have only just realised that your example is frrom the magnificent Grumiaux recording, not from SM strings...



The day I can do something like that with a virtual violin... will be an extremely scary day for me, to say the least! 

It was meant to be just an example, so that Daniele could listen to those overtones in a real context, and understand what I, in my akward English, was trying to explain about bow pressure and bow speed. Sorry, if it caused some missunderstanding. It must have been really shocking! 

I did a mockup of an excerpt from this presto time ago, though, layering some bow noise samples on top of SM violn (probably not a good idea after listening to Grumiaux, but if you are curious: https://vi-control.net/community/th...-ensemble-strings-released.84409/post-4434321). I might try it again with the new detaché if the project is still there on my HD.

I still maintain what I said in that post about the plasticity and flexibility of SM strings. And it's only getting better.


----------



## Vardaro

I suppose the timbral shaping will correspond to trying different kinds of string (gut, steel or nylon cores) and the way they set off the myriad resonances of the body IRs?


----------



## DANIELE

Vardaro said:


> I suppose the timbral shaping will correspond to trying different kinds of string (gut, steel or nylon cores) and the way they set off the myriad resonances of the body IRs?



Probably but the question is more about changing timbral shaping value in real time during the performance.


----------



## I like music

Vardaro said:


> I suppose the timbral shaping will correspond to trying different kinds of string (gut, steel or nylon cores) and the way they set off the myriad resonances of the body IRs?



Right. I'm just wondering if someone has any principles e.g. if you increase the first 3 harmonics then the timbre changes in this way, or, if you reduce something by x then don't increase something else etc. Any guidelines would be really helpful. Need to sit down and mess around here to see if I can trial-and-error it. Problem is, trial-and-error, when I don't understand even the basic concept of what changes what, would just be error-and-error.


----------



## Vardaro

It willalso correspond to playing nearer to, or farther from, the bridge: nearer gives more high harmonics.


----------



## I like music

Vardaro said:


> It willalso correspond to playing nearer to, or farther from, the bridge: nearer gives more high harmonics.



Wait, that's really interesting. So can approximate sul ponticello etc by acting on lets say the last few harmonics? Haven't been able to touch the computer in weeks due to work. Hoping I can have a crack at it soon.


----------



## philippe goi

a short excerpt Ravel quartet V1.1 solo strings


----------



## mohsohsenshi

philippe goi said:


> a short excerpt Ravel quartet V1.1 solo strings



Nice demo.
In my opinion, the vibrato of 1st Violin could be more aggressive and intense, which will sound more convincing. And at some points the dynamic just decreases too fast, sounds like it chokes at times.


----------



## robgb

mohsohsenshi said:


> Nice demo.
> In my opinion, the vibrato of 1st Violin could be more aggressive and intense, which will sound more convincing. And at some points the dynamic just decreases too fast, sounds like it chokes at times.


It can be pretty aggressive if you want it to be. The number of tweaks possible with this library is staggering. I've had it a week or so now and I'm still finding new things—even after reading the manual...


----------



## robgb

philippe goi said:


> a short excerpt Ravel quartet V1.1 solo strings


Quite beautiful.


----------



## mohsohsenshi

robgb said:


> It can be pretty aggressive if you want it to be. The number of tweaks possible with this library is staggering. I've had it a week or so now and I'm still finding new things—even after reading the manual...



Yes, it is one of most tweakable solo strings, while holding the ultra realism. I got the violin patch last week and tested a bit, nice tone, much more controllable in performance, less resources consuming, comparing to Embertone JBV. But I still struggle between it and SWAM, since I may end up layering it with other ensemble strings libraries more often.
Also I have 50% discount of SWAM.


----------



## muziksculp

I'm still trying to make up my mind if I should get this library. Hmmm... Do I need another Strings Library  ?

Here is a video showing in more detail the amount of control offered by this library, quite impressive, but could also lead to a lot of surgical programming which could lead to endless tweaking, given the possibilities, and combinations of parameters, and how they interact.


----------



## robgb

muziksculp said:


> I'm still trying to make up my mind if I should get this library. Hmmm... Do I need another Strings Library  ?
> 
> Here is a video showing in more detail the amount of control offered by this library, quite impressive, but could also lead to a lot of surgical programming which could lead to endless tweaking, given the possibilities, and combinations of parameters, and how they interact.



Here's my review, released this morning. I thought my last string library would be Spitfire Studio Strings, but this one is something special:


----------



## muziksculp

@robgb Thanks for your helpful review.

I'm in no rush to buy this library, although it has a lot of potential. 

I wish it was discounted, or maybe they will have a special offer in the future. I'm also waiting to see what LASS 3 will offer when it is released, but not sure when that will happen.


----------



## robgb

muziksculp said:


> @robgb Thanks for your helpful review.
> 
> I'm in no rush to buy this library, although it has a lot of potential.
> 
> I wish it was discounted, or maybe they will have a special offer in the future. I'm also waiting to see what LASS 3 will offer when it is released, but not sure when that will happen.


I'm hoping that, like the violin, they'll allow people to purchase it in pieces. But I have no idea whether that will happen.


----------



## muk

The possibilities of shaping the musical performance with Sample Modeling Strings are very intriguing. The drawback of this library, for me, is the tone/timbre. It's hard to describe, much easier to hear. So I made a quick mockup of @Saxer's lovely demo 'Little Magic Flower' with Cinematic Studio Strings. Please try to focus on the timbral differences, not the sonic differences of the mockups (pardon the little glitches in my mockup and the freestyle harp). Saxer's musicality is unbeatable, and that is what makes this demo so great in my opinion. My observation is solely about the sound signature of the library.

Playability and flexibility seem to be the strong points of Sample Modeling Strings. At least to my ears, however, the sound is not quite as sweet as the one of strings that were recorded in a great room.


https://www.sample-modeling.com/Demos/STRINGS/Little_Magic_Flower_Torsten_Kamps.wav








Little Magic Flower CSS.mp3 | Powered by Box







app.box.com


----------



## robgb

muk said:


> The possibilities of shaping the musical performance with Sample Modeling Strings are very intriguing. The drawback of this library, for me, is the tone/timbre. It's hard to describe, much easier to hear. So I made a quick mockup of @Saxer's lovely demo 'Little Magic Flower' with Cinematic Studio Strings. Please try to focus on the timbral differences, not the sonic differences of the mockups (pardon the little glitches in my mockup and the freestyle harp). Saxer's musicality is unbeatable, and that is what makes this demo so great in my opinion. My observation is solely about the sound signature of the library.
> 
> Playability and flexibility seem to be the strong points of Sample Modeling Strings. At least to my ears, however, the sound is not quite as sweet as the one of strings that were recorded in a great room.
> 
> 
> https://www.sample-modeling.com/Demos/STRINGS/Little_Magic_Flower_Torsten_Kamps.wav
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Little Magic Flower CSS.mp3 | Powered by Box
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> app.box.com


I don't know, there are timbral differences in every library. And you can do amazing things with EQ and a multi-band compressor. I think the sample modeling strings sound just fine. In fact I think they sound very good. Especially the solo strings. But like any flexible library it may take a little longer to get exactly the sound you want. At least you have that flexibility.


----------



## clisma

@muk 

It’s kind of you to offer this comparison. In theory I agree with your assessment, having just purchased only the Violins as a trial run. But listening to both examples back to back, and fully expecting to prefer our beloved CSS, I was amazed that my ears focused immediately on the performance and delivery rather than timbre/sound.

Your mockups are always stellar, but compared with the SM (and kudos to Saxer of course) CSS betrays its sampled origin as soon as the stitched-together melody appears.


----------



## robgb

muk said:


> Playability and flexibility seem to be the strong points of Sample Modeling Strings. At least to my ears, however, the sound is not quite as sweet as the one of strings that were recorded in a great room.


I finally got a chance to listen, and to be frank, the CSS version sounds like a beautifully rendered sample library to my ears, whereas the Sample Modeling version sounds very close—and I hesitate when I say this—to the real thing to me. CSS has that rich darker tone, yes, but I prefer the SM version.


----------



## muk

Thanks for your thoughts @clisma and @robgb. I know what you mean. Saxer's demo has that beautiful flow and musicality. My CSS example is not as smooth performance wise. Especially the legatos in the moving lines stick out here and there. Strictly tone-wise, personally I prefer the CSS example. I can hear the individual players in that sound. That's simply a subjective preference though. I absolutely agree that Saxer's demo is simply fabuolous.


----------



## robgb

muk said:


> Thanks for your thoughts @clisma and @robgb. I know what you mean. Saxer's demo has that beautiful flow and musicality. My CSS example is not as smooth performance wise. Especially the legatos in the moving lines stick out here and there. Strictly tone-wise, personally I prefer the CSS example. I can hear the individual players in that sound. That's simply a subjective preference though. I absolutely agree that Saxer's demo is simply fabuolous.


Yeah, it's all, ultimately, subjective. But at some point I'm going to put my money where my mouth is and try to demonstrate how to get different tones out of your libraries in post. I plan on doing tips and tricks on the YouTube channel, so maybe that'll be one of them.


----------



## mohsohsenshi

robgb said:


> Yeah, it's all, ultimately, subjective. But at some point I'm going to put my money where my mouth is and try to demonstrate how to get different tones out of your libraries in post. I plan on doing tips and tricks on the YouTube channel, so maybe that'll be one of them.



Looking forward to watch your tutorial and see how these tips work for SM Strings.


----------



## DANIELE

robgb said:


> Yeah, it's all, ultimately, subjective. But at some point I'm going to put my money where my mouth is and try to demonstrate how to get different tones out of your libraries in post. I plan on doing tips and tricks on the YouTube channel, so maybe that'll be one of them.



This could be very insteresting and useful.


----------



## I like music

All I can say is that on some days and in some contexts, these strings are the best sample library I've purchased. And on other days, somehow the sound/timbre disappear and I'm left scratching my head. 

Ultimately I'm so happy with them, but for once I can say that this IS one of those librares that you can make sound very good one minute, and very bad the next. Small tweaks in one of the many settings can change the WHOLE sound tremendously.

All of that said, I do think that at pp/p, the library is slightly weaker (if you do sustains). Feels like the sound goes behind a curtain.

But yeah, I'd buy this without hesitation. One of my favourite libraries ever.


----------



## DANIELE

This library require a lot of practice to be used well but it has a huge potential.

Maybe I found a trick to overcome the abrupt attack thing we talked about some posts ago. On reaper I'm using a MIDI Mapper plugin to let the CC starts at 8 and not at 0 (for dynamics) to have a little less strong sound I linked the CC 2 with a volume plugin that act only in the very first few units of the dynamics.

If someone is interested let me know.


----------



## robgb

DANIELE said:


> On reaper I'm using a MIDI Mapper plugin to let the CC starts at 8


In Reaper, instead of using a MIDI mapper, you can also go to the Kontakt instance, right click on Param and add a CC controller there to whatever you want. Then you can assign the range you desire. I do it for vibrato to limit the intensity when I'm playing. Then I save it as a track template and I'm good. For some reason if I try to do it directly in Kontakt using the CC automation, vibrato reverts to CC1, which I don't want.


----------



## DANIELE

robgb said:


> In Reaper, instead of using a MIDI mapper, you can also go to the Kontakt instance, right click on Param and add a CC controller there to whatever you want. Then you can assign the range you desire. I do it for vibrato to limit the intensity when I'm playing. Then I save it as a track template and I'm good. For some reason if I try to do it directly in Kontakt using the CC automation, vibrato reverts to CC1, which I don't want.



Yeah I know, I could use it for breath controller to have a linear response but for the volume thing I have to shape a curve that suits my needs. Midi mapper X is perfect for this.
I'm testing this solution in a piece I'm writing and for now it is working flawlessly.


----------



## philippe goi

New Ravel Quartet version with Timbral Shaping!


----------



## Vardaro

"New Ravel Quartet version with Timbral Shaping"

Superb!
But my viola teacher used to say "don't make a melody out of each note" ..


----------



## Bollen

I love what everybody's doing with this library, but I'm still unconvinced. It still sounds very synthy to me, but it's gotten to the point that if they ever sold a solo strings package I might be tempted to buy it just to experiment. It does occasionally sound quite realistic... But only for brief moments.


----------



## robgb

Bollen said:


> I love what everybody's doing with this library, but I'm still unconvinced. It still sounds very synthy to me, but it's gotten to the point that if they ever sold a solo strings package I might be tempted to buy it just to experiment. It does occasionally sound quite realistic... But only for brief moments.


I've said this many times before, but I usually only hear the "synthy" comments when the listener actually knows that modeling is involved. A blind test would likely elicit a different response. Take a look at my signature line...


----------



## Bollen

robgb said:


> I've said this many times before, but I usually only hear the "synthy" comments when the listener actually knows that modeling is involved. A blind test would likely elicit a different response. Take a look at my signature line...


Yes of course, but that's just not the case with me... I'm literally surrounded by real strings all the day long and I even play some of them. I think it might be the other way around, I just haven't developed the tolerance that people that work all day long with computers seem to have. For example, I have many colleagues that still compose using the old inbuilt terrible sounds that notation programs have. I can't stand it and I'm not even near as intolerant as most instrumentalists I know, but the aforementioned composers have developed complete immunity to it and can hear beyond it. It's like an uncanny valley thing but for sound...


----------



## mohsohsenshi

Bollen said:


> Yes of course, but that's just not the case with me... I'm literally surrounded by real strings all the day long and I even play some of them. I think it might be the other way around, I just haven't developed the tolerance that people that work all day long with computers seem to have. For example, I have many colleagues that still compose using the old inbuilt terrible sounds that notation programs have. I can't stand it and I'm not even near as intolerant as most instrumentalists I know, but the aforementioned composers have developed complete immunity to it and can hear beyond it. It's like an uncanny valley thing but for sound...



VIs never beat the real thing, at least with current technology.
May I ask which string library you think get close to the real one ? I still collect opinions for my future purchase, from those who have more experience in strings.


----------



## robgb

Nothing synthy here, if you ask me:


----------



## Batrawi

The tone of this library is warm & natural. It is literally that tiny little split-second legato transition which can colour the whole sound with synthyness. 
I think this is what SM needs to focus on in their coming updates in order to improve realism. 
I said that before, but there needs to be some sort of noise layers added to these legato transitions (to feel that fingure pressure on on the string, sliding, tapping etc..) otherwise the transitions are completely exposed in this weird uncanny valley, sounding extremely smooth and bendy...


----------



## dormusic

Batrawi said:


> The tone of this library is warm & natural. It is literally that tiny little split-second legato transition which can colour the whole sound with synthyness.
> I think this is what SM needs to focus on in their coming updates in order to improve realism.
> I said that before, but there needs to be some sort of noise layers added to these legato transitions (to feel that fingure pressure on on the string, sliding, tapping etc..) otherwise the transitions are completely exposed in this weird uncanny valley, sounding extremely smooth and bendy...


It's also the melting of the attacks to the main sound. Hate to admit it, but the off the string artics require a lot of work.


----------



## robgb

While the pursuit of perfection is an admirable thing, I highly doubt anyone can hear these "problems" except experienced string players.


----------



## Bollen

mohsohsenshi said:


> VIs never beat the real thing, at least with current technology.
> May I ask which string library you think get close to the real one ? I still collect opinions for my future purchase, from those who have more experience in strings.


Well, I've said it before, for me personally it's hard to get any closer to reality than Vienna Dimension Strings, but you have to program them separately and use literally every patch and keyswitches for nearly every note. You have to use your ears and not the patch name i.e. sometimes the Sus is not the most appropriate for a long note, nor the stacc for a short, etc. This is why I find the Ensemble so fake sounding, its way too tight. Not even the best string ensembles in the world would be that tight. It's particularly obvious in the dynamic transitions (more than the legato) I would say.

The solo strings have a different problem, but it's also in the dynamic changes. There's a point between dynamic transitions where it sounds like a volume knob rather than a real instrument. That's why I almost always try to use arcs for dynamic changes rather than a controller if possible. The attacks also have a weird machine like consistency, but I'm sure this can just be programmed out with more variation. 

I wish Sample modelling had made at least the different desks separately editable, I'm sure then you could hide away almost all the issues I hear.


----------



## philippe goi

Fast improvisation Strings set v1.1 and spacialization experience in MIR PRO
View attachment SAMPLE MODELING STRINGS ENSEMBLE AND MIR PRO.mp4


----------



## robgb

Bollen said:


> The solo strings have a different problem, but it's also in the dynamic changes. There's a point between dynamic transitions where it sounds like a volume knob rather than a real instrument.


I'm not sure how you're getting this. When I use CC1 (changed from CC11), I find that the dynamic transitions are very smooth and much more than simply volume. The timbre and bow strength (for lack of a better term, because I'm not a violinist) change as well. Add in CC11 vibrato control (as I've assigned it, using an X/Y pad) and the sound is very convincing to my ears. You might want to play with attack and the velocity to dynamics dial as well for subtle changes.

To my mind these are the most convincing solo instruments I've played. But, of course, these things are subjective.


----------



## Bollen

robgb said:


> I'm not sure how you're getting this. When I use CC1 (changed from CC11), I find that the dynamic transitions are very smooth and much more than simply volume. The timbre and bow strength (for lack of a better term, because I'm not a violinist) change as well. Add in CC11 vibrato control (as I've assigned it, using an X/Y pad) and the sound is very convincing to my ears. You might want to play with attack and the velocity to dynamics dial as well for subtle changes.
> 
> To my mind these are the most convincing solo instruments I've played. But, of course, these things are subjective.


Yeah I know, if I had them I could record a little snippet so you could compare. But as I've said before, I'm sure most of these issues could be hidden away with enough varied programming. However, the tightness of the ensembles doesn't seem to have a workaround...

PS: I'm glad Giorgio is keeping an eye on these conversations, maybe he'll take ideas for future developments (i.e. independent desks )


----------



## Woodie1972

How do these strings respond to plain CC data like dynamics in Dorico f.e., instead of using a breath controller or ride the modwheel all the time? I'm really interested in this library, but I want to use it with written dynamics as my keyboard skills aren't good enough to play and use the controllers at the same time.
I use dynamics pretty much to shape frases, so there's quite a lot of info like that in my scores.


----------



## robgb

Woodie1972 said:


> How do these strings respond to plain CC data like dynamics in Dorico f.e., instead of using a breath controller or ride the modwheel all the time? I'm really interested in this library, but I want to use it with written dynamics as my keyboard skills aren't good enough to play and use the controllers at the same time.
> I use dynamics pretty much to shape frases, so there's quite a lot of info like that in my scores.


I don't use Dorico, but I don't use a breath controller either. If you check out my review on YouTube, that was all done with a TouchOSC x/y controller with CC1/CC11. Which, of course, are easy enough to edit to your heart's content.


----------



## mohsohsenshi

Woodie1972 said:


> How do these strings respond to plain CC data like dynamics in Dorico f.e., instead of using a breath controller or ride the modwheel all the time? I'm really interested in this library, but I want to use it with written dynamics as my keyboard skills aren't good enough to play and use the controllers at the same time.
> I use dynamics pretty much to shape frases, so there's quite a lot of info like that in my scores.



It won't matter if you don't have any controller.
Breath controller is to achieve extra humanised performance.

You can even draw CC curve data by hand like I did in this thread:





Solo strings, SWAM or Sample Modeling?


For realism nothing matches sound of the Bohemian violin by Virharmonic. I like SWAM and SM strings too, but if you want realism, there is still no contest, AFAIC.




vi-control.net




Though it's SWAM Strings, they somehow follow the same CC control logic.

I don't have Dorico, if it allows you to draw any CC data as in DAW, no controller is needed.


----------



## muziksculp

Hi,

Regarding _bowed short note articulations_ for both Solo and Ensemble versions of SM Strings.

Is there a lot of control options to customize the short articulation sounds of both the solo and ensemble versions ? i.e. the amount of bow screech, speed, pressure, or harshness ? playing stacc. vs. Staccatisimo vs Spicc. ? customized dynamics response for short notes ?

I would like to hear more demos showing the variety of short notes that can be obtained by this library.

Thanks


----------



## robgb

muziksculp said:


> Hi,
> 
> Regarding _bowed short note articulations_ for both Solo and Ensemble versions of SM Strings.
> 
> Is there a lot of control options to customize the short articulation sounds of both the solo and ensemble versions ? i.e. the amount of bow screech, speed, pressure, or harshness ? playing stacc. vs. Staccatisimo vs Spicc. ? customized dynamics response for short notes ?
> 
> I would like to hear more demos showing the variety of short notes that can be obtained by this library.
> 
> Thanks


Not sure if this is what you're looking for, but the sound is controllable by velocity, expression, attack and a number of other factors. There are MULTIPLE CCs you can tweak. What I've done here is simply play with velocity, expression and attack, and you'll note that the changes are subtle but realistic, which is personally what I want, but you might have different ideas.


----------



## muziksculp

robgb said:


> Not sure if this is what you're looking for, but the sound is controllable by velocity, expression, attack and a number of other factors. There are MULTIPLE CCs you can tweak. What I've done here is simply play with velocity, expression and attack, and you'll note that the changes are subtle but realistic, which is personally what I want, but you might have different ideas.



Thanks for the feedback, and short demo. 

I'm more interested in hearing a demo showing the variety of short note articulations, and how their character can be customized i.e. just like a real player can vary the sound via speed, pressure, ... of the bowing. 

There are so many flavors a combination of these parameters can produce. I want to hear more of the screechy sounds of bowing short notes, I don't hear that in many demos. i.e. for Tango music. or for fast ostinato lines that require a sharper sounding bow attack with a bit of that bow screech accenting the start of the notes when a player applies more pressure on the bow.


----------



## robgb

muziksculp said:


> Thanks for the feedback, and short demo.
> 
> I'm more interested in hearing a demo showing the variety of short note articulations, and how their character can be customized i.e. just like a real player can vary the sound via speed, pressure, ... of the bowing.
> 
> There are so many flavors a combination of these parameters can produce. I want to hear more of the screechy sounds of bowing short notes, I don't hear that in many demos. i.e. for Tango music. or for fast ostinato lines that require a sharper sounding bow attack with a bit of that bow screech accenting the start of the notes when a player applies more pressure on the bow.


I think the only way you're going to get screech is by adding something like OTT to the track. But that "screechy" sound, to my mind, seems overdone in an attempt at realism, and it really isn't that real. Even the "screechy" violins in Psycho aren't really that screechy or scratchy. There just brilliantly written and orchestrated.


----------



## muziksculp

robgb said:


> I think the only way you're going to get screech is by adding something like OTT to the track. But that "screechy" sound, to my mind, seems overdone in an attempt at realism, and it really isn't that real. Even the "screechy" violins in Psycho aren't really that screechy or scratchy. There just brilliantly written and orchestrated.



I'm not referring to extreme screechy sounds, but just varying degrees of it starting with very low ppp dynamics that have almost none of it, and increase it as needed as the dynamics increase towards the forte range. imho. this is very important detail to have if realism is the objective.


----------



## Woodie1972

robgb said:


> I don't use Dorico, but I don't use a breath controller either. If you check out my review on YouTube, that was all done with a TouchOSC x/y controller with CC1/CC11. Which, of course, are easy enough to edit to your heart's content.



Thanks for your reply and the demo you created, it made things more clear. 
My main library now is VSL orchestral strings and appasionata strings. I really like them, but sometimes they are too demanding to tweak before you get a good result, so I was looking for a string library that is very playable and needs less tweaking. I have the brass library from sample modeling and I think it's not the most easy to use, except for the trombone IMO, so because of that I'm a bit hesitating to buy another library from the same developer.


----------



## I like music

My people. Wondering if what I'm doing with my strings is something that is ever advised against?

I took my SM strings, I took some CSS sustains (close mic only) and played all my lines with these layered. Got a stonkingly good sound. It would _seem_ like the agility of SM Strings does shine through and CSS's tone and detail also does.

I wasn't hearing anything weird, and found they complimented each other. In fact, With this setup, I could just 'play' phrases. I'm wondering if there are any pitfalls to consider here?

Sounded alright but I'm sure more knowledgable people here would chime in. I guess the panning/positioning side is one where I MAY have noticed a few issues. CSS pans much more than SM. Can I simply 'cancel' this pan out through Kontakt's PAN knob or would that be problematic with CSS?


----------



## robgb

Layering is a common and useful technique.


----------



## I like music

robgb said:


> Layering is a common and useful technique.


Have never done it before so I wasn't sure what it usually entails. And any special tips to keep in mind.

So far this is working very well for the strings. Tried it on brass too (csb and infinite) and for ensemble single lines, working very well too! 

I guess if it sounds alright, why not.


----------



## Vardaro

Screech etc?
Personally I'm pleased that SM strings sound even better than my own playing.

It's a bit like wanting too many portamentos when classical players try strenuously to hide them!


----------



## robgb

muziksculp said:


> I'm not referring to extreme screechy sounds, but just varying degrees of it starting with very low ppp dynamics that have almost none of it, and increase it as needed as the dynamics increase towards the forte range. imho. this is very important detail to have if realism is the objective.


Ahh. Sample Modeling definitely has that, but not to the extreme screechiness of Audio Modeling strings.


----------



## muziksculp

robgb said:


> Ahh. Sample Modeling definitely has that, but not to the extreme screechiness of Audio Modeling strings.



That's good to know. Thanks

Hearing some audio demos showing this detail would be very helpful. I don't recall any existing videos showing this.


----------



## I like music

muziksculp said:


> That's good to know. Thanks
> 
> Hearing some audio demos showing this detail would be very helpful. I don't recall any existing videos showing this.


I believe there was a demo on their site (with downloadable midi) which showcased such a demo with lots of the scratchiness, and I believe there were a few different types of shorts sounds and techniques highlighted. Might have been a viola one. Will see if I can find it. You may already have seen it in which case ignore me.


----------



## muziksculp

I like music said:


> I believe there was a demo on their site (with downloadable midi) which showcased such a demo with lots of the scratchiness, and I believe there were a few different types of shorts sounds and techniques highlighted. Might have been a viola one. Will see if I can find it. You may already have seen it in which case ignore me.



Hi,

No, I don't recall seeing a video showing this, so I will try to find it, or maybe a link here would help. 

Thanks.


----------



## muziksculp

@I like music, 

Hi, is this the video you were referring to ?


----------



## I like music

muziksculp said:


> @I like music,
> 
> Hi, is this the video you were referring to ?



No. It was a different demo. Will be on my computer in an hour so will try to find it and send your way. It was just an audio demo and they made a point to say to people that we should download the midi to see how they achieved the sound. Now I fear I have your hopes up and may have just invented this.


----------



## muziksculp

I like music said:


> No. It was a different demo. Will be on my computer in an hour so will try to find it and send your way. It was just an audio demo and they made a point to say to people that we should download the midi to see how they achieved the sound. Now I fear I have your hopes up and may have just invented this.



I see. I really appreciate you help. Thank You.


----------



## muziksculp

The Paganini Solo Violin demo on their demos section has quite a bit of bow-noise & screech. They also have the midi file to see how the controllers were used to achieve this. I think this is very close to what I was trying to find out if their instruments can achieve. I wonder if this is also possible to control when using the string ensemble versions ?



http://www.sample-modeling.com/Demos/STRINGS/Fabio/wav/7_Paganini_Capriccio_n1.wav


----------



## I like music

muziksculp said:


> The Paganini Solo Violin demo on their demos section has quite a bit of bow-noise & screech. They also have the midi file to see how the controllers used to achieve this. I think this is very close to what I was trying to find out if their instruments can achieve. I wonder if this is also possible to control when using the string ensemble versions ?
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.sample-modeling.com/Demos/STRINGS/Fabio/wav/7_Paganini_Capriccio_n1.wav


Hah that's the demo I was thinking about!


----------



## muziksculp

I like music said:


> Hah that's the demo I was thinking about!



Thanks for confirming. Well.. if their String Ensembles also have this type of controls, I'm sold on getting SM Solo & Ensemble Strings library.


----------



## muziksculp

I'm also impressed with the ability of SM Strings to sound warm/smooth , the legato strings heard in this demo at slow tempo, are very natural sounding to my ears. Very nice ! 



http://www.sample-modeling.com/Demos/STRINGS/Dark_Side_Of_The_Room_Torsten_Kamps.wav


----------



## I like music

muziksculp said:


> I'm also impressed with the ability of SM Strings to sound warm/smooth , the legato strings heard in this demo at slow tempo, are very natural sounding to my ears. Very nice !
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.sample-modeling.com/Demos/STRINGS/Dark_Side_Of_The_Room_Torsten_Kamps.wav



Super agile strings. I did a demo of Mulan and though there are lots of mixing issues with it, you can get a really good idea of the agility of the strings. Let me know if you want to hear an example.


----------



## muziksculp

I like music said:


> Super agile strings. I did a demo of Mulan and though there are lots of mixing issues with it, you can get a really good idea of the agility of the strings. Let me know if you want to hear an example.



Sure, I'm interested in listening to an example of your Mulan demo. Thanks. 

Were the mixing issues something specific to this library that you don't encounter with other string libraries ?


----------



## I like music

muziksculp said:


> Sure, I'm interested in listening to an example of your Mulan demo. Thanks.
> 
> Were the mixing issues something specific to this library that you don't encounter with other string libraries ?



Nah, just me being absolutely terrible and having zero mixing skills. That and the fact that I do music out of a small cupboard means that I haven't ever heard my libraries in a good listening environment, OR with monitors (or even decent headphones ... mine cost $50)

I'll dig it out and send it your way!


----------



## muziksculp

This thread is 37 pages long, and is a very good resource to better evaluate this library. I'm having fun going through it from page 1, haha... I'm at page 7, lots of interesting posts so far.


----------



## x-dfo

I'd love to hear what fellow owners are doing to expand the sound of the ensembles. I find they're a bit of a strange sound, like it's an ensemble... but it's a blurry ensemble? Like my ears can't figure out how many players there are, sometimes it sounds like few, other times many. Is it just mixing? or are people doing super combinations of many layered ensembles?


----------



## robgb

x-dfo said:


> I'd love to hear what fellow owners are doing to expand the sound of the ensembles. I find they're a bit of a strange sound, like it's an ensemble... but it's a blurry ensemble? Like my ears can't figure out how many players there are, sometimes it sounds like few, other times many. Is it just mixing? or are people doing super combinations of many layered ensembles?


There's a control (CC95) that controls the size of the ensembles, small, medium, large, and the differences are pretty distinct.


----------



## I like music

robgb said:


> There's a control (CC95) that controls the size of the ensembles, small, medium, large, and the differences are pretty distinct.



Yep. When you mess with vibrato on bigger sections it is more subtle but if you go tor the smallest section possible you can basically hear super distinct vibratos etc etc


----------



## x-dfo

robgb said:


> There's a control (CC95) that controls the size of the ensembles, small, medium, large, and the differences are pretty distinct.


Oh yes, been playing with that, but it still feels like it needs layering with a sample based library to really get that body.


----------



## TGV

Idk if this is the proper place, but... what does CC4 do? I've bought the strings package (upgraded from the violins), and have been looking at the MIDI files, and I see that there is CC4, in both the solo and the ensemble demos, but it's not documented. It's also difficult to tell if it actually makes a difference in the sound.


----------



## I like music

x-dfo said:


> Oh yes, been playing with that, but it still feels like it needs layering with a sample based library to really get that body.


Layered it with close mics of CSS and got some lovely results. What have you combined it with?


----------



## x-dfo

I like music said:


> Layered it with close mics of CSS and got some lovely results. What have you combined it with?


nothing yet! I haven't had a chance to give it a try - but CSS was on my list 
you wouln'dt have an example of just a short phrase to see?


----------



## robgb

x-dfo said:


> Oh yes, been playing with that, but it still feels like it needs layering with a sample based library to really get that body.


Well, I layer libraries all the time, but I'm not sure this library needs it. Go back and listen to Saxer's demo somewhere on this thread.


----------



## I like music

x-dfo said:


> nothing yet! I haven't had a chance to give it a try - but CSS was on my list
> you wouln'dt have an example of just a short phrase to see?


Yes I can get one uploaded tomorrow. However, I'll caveat by saying that my mixing etc is usually atrocious so that may colour your view negatively. 

I'll upload a few different setups.


----------



## I like music

robgb said:


> Well, I layer libraries all the time, but I'm not sure this library needs it. Go back and listen to Saxer's demo somewhere on this thread.


Rob, I've always been a vocal supporter of this library and think it is absolutely fantastic. However, the cellos still feel a tad behind their other sections. Do you have a view on the cellos or am I just not hearing them right?


----------



## x-dfo

robgb said:


> Well, I layer libraries all the time, but I'm not sure this library needs it. Go back and listen to Saxer's demo somewhere on this thread.


that's what lead me to believe it needs a bit of layering, some of those timbres are ear pokers to me, no offense intended!


----------



## Bollen

I'd be interested to hear some layering with the solos... In a lot of my favourite recordings there are moments where the 1st chair really stands out from the section. For me it's one of those things that tell a real section from samples.... I always try to mimic that. So I wonder how the SM solos sound as first chairs... Presumably very compatible?


----------



## I like music

Bollen said:


> I'd be interested to hear some layering with the solos... In a lot of my favourite recordings there are moments where the 1st chair really stands out from the section. For me it's one of those things that tell a real section from samples.... I always try to mimic that. So I wonder how the SM solos sound as first chairs... Presumably very compatible?


I believe they sound fantastic as first chairs. Will try to upload a example.


----------



## leon chevalier

Bollen said:


> I'd be interested to hear some layering with the solos... In a lot of my favourite recordings there are moments where the 1st chair really stands out from the section. For me it's one of those things that tell a real section from samples.... I always try to mimic that. So I wonder how the SM solos sound as first chairs... Presumably very compatible?




All four tutorials are done this way if I remember


----------



## Bollen

leon chevalier said:


> All four tutorials are done this way if I remember



Yes I've heard this before, it's truly remarkable! I would still prefer to hear them in (self)isolation without other instruments...


----------



## robgb

Bollen said:


> Yes I've heard this before, it's truly remarkable! I would still prefer to hear them in (self)isolation without other instruments...


Hearing any sampled instrument in isolation is not really going to give you the overall picture, however.


----------



## Bollen

robgb said:


> Hearing any sampled instrument in isolation is not really going to give you the overall picture, however.


True, but for me personally it tells me a lot... In particular where the failings are and consequently how I need to hide them  . If it's hideable, then I'll buy it!


----------



## EuropaWill

Gene Cornelius said:


> OK, so I'm having some luck, but not there yet. Speaking only about the violin, it is fairly accurate to say I'm aiming for a sound/feel that is most similar to the violin in the Anne Dudley Poldark Theme. To say I'm botching that would be also accurate.
> 
> Also, I've been composing with Maschine, mk3. I use the Maschine pads and also my S88 keyboard to write and fiddle about. What I NEED to do is to move my creation process back over to ProTools ... Maschine's MIDI implementation and editing is horrible, and while the setup is conducive to creative flow, it makes it next to impossible to fix things without breaking other things, including, but not limited to that fact that it's not saving some of my input for some reason. It is also why you will hear dropouts in the violin. (the rest of the flaws are just me being lame ... it's a work in progress, and I'm very slow).
> 
> So here are two iterations of the same song: One with Fluffy Audio's Trio Bros Violin, which is what I used when writing. The other version is of course the SM Violin, which for the life of me I cannot make it NOT sound like a clarinet.
> 
> THe piano is NI Noire, and the cellos are Chris Hein.
> 
> I WISH WISH WISH that the makers of SM Strings had included several style presets - even as broad as "Classical" "Gypsy" "Contemporary" that were playable out of the box. I also wish for a way for us to share snapshots or presets ... is there? So far my attempts to save those always come back incomplete ... something is always missing, including, but not limited to, Timbral Shaping presets ... ???
> 
> Here is the SM Violin version:
> 
> Here is the Fluffy Audio version:



Yes, it very much sounds like a clarinet or blown instrument to my ears as well in this example. Are you using a breath controller for dynamics? That might explain the phrasing part sounding woodwind. It isn't just the phrasing, but the timbre for sure. Harmonic content sounds more clarinet than violin here.


----------



## EuropaWill

servandus said:


> Those overtones are usually produced in moderate to fast detaché (and also legato) bowings due mainly to brief "incongruencies" (sorry for my English, I can't find a better word) between bow pressure and bow speed. If you listen carefully to movements like the presto in Bach g minor sonata for example, you can clearly hear a lot of them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'd say the use of the overtone controller is probably more effective in solo mockups than in ensemble, just because the solo sound is naked, and all those sonic artifacts are more easily and clearly audible.
> 
> Hope that helps



OMG my eyes bugged out of my head when I heard this thinking it was SM Violin....but alas it's not but a master violinist playing a violin. It is a great example though of those interesting "incongruencies" you're talking about, squeeks or odd body resonances that are still one of those elements that I wish will be modeled. They show up also during fingered legato that I'm always straining to hear in VST's but never seem to hear. Great example of what SM and other developers should be striving towards.


----------



## Leandro Gardini

leon chevalier said:


> All four tutorials are done this way if I remember



I didn't use solos in all the four examples but it wouldn't be a bad idea. In fact, SM strings will always sound more realistic if you layer it with a solo using the right technique.


----------



## leon chevalier

leogardini said:


> I didn't use solos in all the four examples but it wouldn't be a bad idea. In fact, SM strings will always sound more realistic if you layer it with a solo using the right technique.


I've just bought it yesterday!

I've already got great results by layer it with CSS. I've to find the right impulse and eq settings to match the CSS sound.
I also can't make my mind between using the solo sound or the ensemble sound when layering. Both sound great.

@leogardini your demos sound absolutely great. Its because of them I made the purchase ! So Thanks !


----------



## Leandro Gardini

leon chevalier said:


> I've just bought it yesterday!
> 
> I've already got great results by layer it with CSS. I've to find the right impulse and eq settings to match the CSS sound.
> I also can't make my mind between using the solo sound or the ensemble sound when layering. Both sound great.
> 
> @leogardini your demos sound absolutely great. Its because of them I made the purchase ! So Thanks !


There were a lot of unfair talks about this library. I am happy the demos could make some people see the potential of SM strings.


----------



## Woodie1972

I asked it before, but there was not a real answer, or maybe I missed it between other replies, so I thought it wouldn't hurt to ask again, so here goes:
How does this library compare to the major libraries like VSL, LASS, Spitfire Symphonic strings to name a few?
I have VSL orchestral strings and I like it very much, but sometimes it's so demanding to get a decent result, that I'm on the lookout for a library that is more instant playable. I'm not fond of CSS, or Cinematic strings, that's not an option, I'm really interested in this specific library.


----------



## gamma-ut

They still need tweaking but the method for tweaking is different: using continuous controllers rather than keyswitches. The upshot is that there is less moving MIDI notes around to compensate for the artefacts of articulation changes but you might have to adjust several CCs at once to get close to the result you want. In general, you've got a better chance, if you're using this with a breath controller, mod wheel and foot pedal or a surface like a Linnstrument or ROLI (or all of the above), to play something in live and have it close to what you want. But getting that right takes practice and a desire to build a setup that lets you do it. So, it's not exactly instant. And you may well be tweaking, but tweaking in a different way.

The VSL setup is pretty good for a keyswitch-based system given that you can set up velocity and CC responses in the matrices, so you may find SM doesn't really give you what you want. What you want may simply be a different matrix setup in VI or VI Pro.

No-one can really answer your question without having a better idea of what you want to achieve and what level of live input you expect to put in.


----------



## Woodie1972

gamma-ut said:


> They still need tweaking but the method for tweaking is different: using continuous controllers rather than keyswitches. The upshot is that there is less moving MIDI notes around to compensate for the artefacts of articulation changes but you might have to adjust several CCs at once to get close to the result you want. In general, you've got a better chance, if you're using this with a breath controller, mod wheel and foot pedal or a surface like a Linnstrument or ROLI (or all of the above), to play something in live and have it close to what you want. But getting that right takes practice and a desire to build a setup that lets you do it. So, it's not exactly instant. And you may well be tweaking, but tweaking in a different way.
> 
> The VSL setup is pretty good for a keyswitch-based system given that you can set up velocity and CC responses in the matrices, so you may find SM doesn't really give you what you want. What you want may simply be a different matrix setup in VI or VI Pro.
> 
> No-one can really answer your question without having a better idea of what you want to achieve and what level of live input you expect to put in.



thanks for the input, that makes things a lot more clear.

Playing with a breath controller, plus riding some wheels/pedals simultaneously is not my cup of tea, so I guess it's not the library for me. Sticking to VSL for now, in the meantime looking if there's something a bit more easy to use.


----------



## robgb

Woodie1972 said:


> Playing with a breath controller, plus riding some wheels/pedals simultaneously is not my cup of tea, so I guess it's not the library for me.


Are you playing live? If not, you don't need to ride pedals/wheels and use a breath controller simultaneously. You can use this library quite satisfactorily using only the modwheel and CC11. A breath controller isn't needed at all.

I switched dynamics to CC1 and vibrato to CC11 and use an X/Y pad or side-by-side faders to control these parameters. Everything else can, like most midi instruments, be tweaked post performance.

The main difference between this library and one like VSL is playability. I can switch between short and long articulations simply by the way I play. Play a short note, you get a short note. Play a long note, you get a long note. Play a longer note, you get a longer note. All without key switching. All without multiple CC manipulation.

Having this ability makes it much more inspiring to play. And once you're done recording the midi, you can go in and tweak it to your heart's content with a myriad of CC controls.


----------



## Woodie1972

Thanks for putting me in doubt again😁.

But to answer your question: no, I don't play live, at least not when entering music into the project, only when I fiddle around. Then it is great when you don't need to use keyswitches, but realtime response from the played instrument.

Depending on the situation/need for my project I either work in Cubase or Dorico.
The latter is of course notation based, so heavily relying on the info from dynamics and articulations you insert in the score. Although you can change many info in the play window, a lot of this data is much more easily tweaked in Cubase.
VSL needs keyswitches, which is a great library, but can take a lot of time to tweak correctly, hence the search for a library making life a bit more easy. Well, at least for my workflow, which is much more notation based than playing live and tweaking in the editors.

But again, on the other hand: I always play my keyboard with a selected instrument to get ideas and when it plays back the way you play on your keyboard, is a great advantage.


----------



## philippe goi

New demo in Baroque style .
set-up: small set, virtual sound stage for spacialisation 
View attachment Samplemodeling Strings Ensemble Baroque Performance.mp4


----------



## Woodie1972

philippe goi said:


> New demo in Baroque style .
> set-up: small set, virtual sound stage for spacialisation
> View attachment Samplemodeling Strings Ensemble Baroque Performance.mp4


Very nice, indeed a baroque sound! Did you use a breath controller here, or did you use modwheel/cc11?


----------



## I like music

philippe goi said:


> New demo in Baroque style .
> set-up: small set, virtual sound stage for spacialisation
> View attachment Samplemodeling Strings Ensemble Baroque Performance.mp4


Fantastic stuff! I would love to know how you used the vibrato rate, depth, and expressive vibrato CCs here.

Perhaps you might be willing to share a midi file, if that's OK with you?


----------



## batonruse

I like music said:


> Fantastic stuff! I would love to know how you used the vibrato rate, depth, and expressive vibrato CCs here.
> 
> Perhaps you might be willing to share a midi file, if that's OK with you?


Absolutely agree, really enjoyed it ....and it would be great if you felt able to share the midi file, thanks.


----------



## Eptesicus

philippe goi said:


> New demo in Baroque style .
> set-up: small set, virtual sound stage for spacialisation
> View attachment Samplemodeling Strings Ensemble Baroque Performance.mp4



This is actually quite impressive. Haven't liked any of the demos i have listened to..until know!

Apart from a few places this was very convincing/real sounding.

Almost all the audio demos on the product page are horrid (not the music, i mean in terms of being convincing).

Edit - the gladiator mock up is pretty good save for a few dodgy transitions. Also, the Vivaldi's Winter Concerto one is pretty good too, mainly the solo violin bits.


----------



## Fa

Woodie1972 said:


> Depending on the situation/need for my project I either work in Cubase or Dorico.
> ...



Well actually I prepared some pretty effective and powerful Expression Maps for Dorico! The last version 3.1 has a fantastic interaction between the Score and the embedded sequencer track, and the new "dynamic" lane of the Play editor is finally fixing all the previous complexity managing automatic vs. edited dynamics. Still in the controller lane you may fine tune at your will all the special controllers of SampleModeling strings (or brass by the way).

In case you will buy the Solo&Ensemble Strings, don't hesitate contacting me, I will be happy sharing my maps and setup for Dorico.


----------



## EmmCeeSq

I've just bought this library. (v1.1) I've found some problematic artifacts between notes G4 and Bb4 (I'd love for someone else to try it, I've got no way of knowing whether this is just on my system). A strange clicking sound on the attack portion of notes. 

Secondly, I'm finding that harmonics don't play back properly (I've only tested the 1st violin ensemble so far) - the harmonic plays, but the fundamental remains, albeit around 50% volume. 

I'd like to know how much of this (if any) is user error. I've reported the artifacts to the developer, and I'm new to the library, so this shouldn't be read as a criticism of S/M quality control, although I confess I'm a little nervous at this stage. I've been using their brass for years, so know my way around how to use it all (it sounds great with the combination of Convolution and Aglo reverb!)

Be really grateful for some advice/opinions. 

Cheers!

Mike


----------



## Fa

Eptesicus said:


> This is actually quite impressive. Haven't liked any of the demos i have listened to..until know!
> 
> Apart from a few places this was very convincing/real sounding.
> 
> Almost all the audio demos on the product page are horrid (not the music, i mean in terms of being convincing).
> 
> Edit - the gladiator mock up is pretty good save for a few dodgy transitions. Also, the Vivaldi's Winter Concerto one is pretty good too, mainly the solo violin bits.



I also loved this pretty nice sequence of Philippe, and I was wondering how it can sound with my more soft and intimate personal set-up. I did a quick trial:


----------



## Eptesicus

Fa said:


> I also loved this pretty nice sequence of Philippe, and I was wondering how it can sound with my more soft and intimate personal set-up. I did a quick trial:




Yep love it. Honestly without listening intently i could be quite easily fooled into thinking that was real.

Cant think of another string library that could do this any better. Maybe SM strings are king of baroque wirting/mock ups .

It does have a lovely chamber sound.


----------



## EmmCeeSq

Done a bit more playing around with these, and they're great! Sound lovely with a convolution as an insert and algo as a send. Getting proper aggressive spiccato is not easy though - anyone got any demos/tips on getting an aggressive spicc. sound? It's the only thing lacking, IMO. The sound is lovely (bar one or two potential CC issues).


----------



## x-dfo

EmmCeeSq said:


> Done a bit more playing around with these, and they're great! Sound lovely with a convolution as an insert and algo as a send. Getting proper aggressive spiccato is not easy though - anyone got any demos/tips on getting an aggressive spicc. sound? It's the only thing lacking, IMO. The sound is lovely (bar one or two potential CC issues).


I'm on the same page, I also wish the tremolo didn't sound so robotic.


----------



## DANIELE

EmmCeeSq said:


> Done a bit more playing around with these, and they're great! Sound lovely with a convolution as an insert and algo as a send. Getting proper aggressive spiccato is not easy though - anyone got any demos/tips on getting an aggressive spicc. sound? It's the only thing lacking, IMO. The sound is lovely (bar one or two potential CC issues).



I think SM Strings is for epic things too and you could achieve a very good spiccato if you want.

Listen to this track I put together to show the use of this library (among other ones) in this kind of stuff.


----------



## Fa

EmmCeeSq said:


> Done a bit more playing around with these, and they're great! Sound lovely with a convolution as an insert and algo as a send. Getting proper aggressive spiccato is not easy though - anyone got any demos/tips on getting an aggressive spicc. sound? It's the only thing lacking, IMO. The sound is lovely (bar one or two potential CC issues).



To get the full potential and flexibility of this VI in the short/aggressive is not as intuitive as other articulations, but still the range of available sounds and colours is large and effective. Here some general rules to understand the logic and start experimenting:

- always remember that dynamic is a combination of the velocity+cc11, it's mandatory, but not enough to write/play high velocity, it inputs a fast attack time and trigger the initial aggressive part of staccatos, but then the cc11 has to be designed with a pick: the form of the cc11 curve will make the staccatos, marcatos and spiccatos emerge the way you want.

for accurate rendering of extreme articulations, never neglect auxiliary controllers:
- the CC38 "attacks" (in menu page "controllers 2") offers the first important support. For the "spiccato" you should avoid the "marcato" attack triggered by CC38>64 (so the cc38 has to be lower than 64, but still high enough if you want it aggressive)

- the cc26 "attack time" (in menu page Controllers 1) will help as well: it shapes the start and the connection between notes, and can make a legato and/or portamento more or less long interacting with the velocity

- the cc22 "overtones" can be introduced to mimic the tone of the strong accents (again just a quick pick during the attack, then back to zero)

- note duration: very short note durations will trigger pure staccato samples without morphing into any sustain, and the cc27 "release time" can manage the length of the following resonance (you may shorten it if you want very sharp and dry staccato in a wet ambience and viceversa).

SUMMARIZING:
- an aggressive staccato off the string or spiccato is played with very short duration, high velocity and high cc11, possibly with cc38>64
- an aggressive staccato on the string is played in a similar way, but slightly longer duration and cc38>64
Other parameters are available for fine-tuning and increasing variety and realism.


----------



## Fa

x-dfo said:


> I'm on the same page, I also wish the tremolo didn't sound so robotic.


Yes tremolo is a bit robotic out of the box, but if you "animate" it with the dynamic and the speed (cc19) it's enhanced dramatically: the logic of the developer was to make it "playable" and not just static, like all the other articulations of the SM instruments.


----------



## x-dfo

Fa said:


> Yes tremolo is a bit robotic out of the box, but if you "animate" it with the dynamic and the speed (cc19) it's enhanced dramatically: the logic of the developer was to make it "playable" and not just static, like all the other articulations of the SM instruments.


hah i was just trying that, I also found the bow sound too strong so turning that down helped - yes that makes sense, just that old sample library habit of pick the articulation and hold down a key


----------



## x-dfo

Fa said:


> To get the full potential and flexibility of this VI in the short/aggressive is not as intuitive as other articulations, but still the range of available sounds and colours is large and effective. Here some general rules to understand the logic and start experimenting:
> 
> - always remember that dynamic is a combination of the velocity+cc11, it's mandatory, but not enough to write/play high velocity, it inputs a fast attack time and trigger the initial aggressive part of staccatos, but then the cc11 has to be designed with a pick: the form of the cc11 curve will make the staccatos, marcatos and spiccatos emerge the way you want.
> 
> for accurate rendering of extreme articulations, never neglect auxiliary controllers:
> - the CC38 "attacks" (in menu page "controllers 2") offers the first important support. For the "spiccato" you should avoid the "marcato" attack triggered by CC38>64 (so the cc38 has to be lower than 64, but still high enough if you want it aggressive)
> 
> - the cc26 "attack time" (in menu page Controllers 1) will help as well: it shapes the start and the connection between notes, and can make a legato and/or portamento more or less long interacting with the velocity
> 
> - the cc22 "overtones" can be introduced to mimic the tone of the strong accents (again just a quick pick during the attack, then back to zero)
> 
> - note duration: very short note durations will trigger pure staccato samples without morphing into any sustain, and the cc27 "release time" can manage the length of the following resonance (you may shorten it if you want very sharp and dry staccato in a wet ambience and viceversa).
> 
> SUMMARIZING:
> - an aggressive staccato off the string or spiccato is played with very short duration, high velocity and high cc11, possibly with cc38>64
> - an aggressive staccato on the string is played in a similar way, but slightly longer duration and cc38>64
> Other parameters are available for fine-tuning and increasing variety and realism.


thanks for this!


----------



## DANIELE

Fa said:


> To get the full potential and flexibility of this VI in the short/aggressive is not as intuitive as other articulations, but still the range of available sounds and colours is large and effective. Here some general rules to understand the logic and start experimenting:
> 
> - always remember that dynamic is a combination of the velocity+cc11, it's mandatory, but not enough to write/play high velocity, it inputs a fast attack time and trigger the initial aggressive part of staccatos, but then the cc11 has to be designed with a pick: the form of the cc11 curve will make the staccatos, marcatos and spiccatos emerge the way you want.
> 
> for accurate rendering of extreme articulations, never neglect auxiliary controllers:
> - the CC38 "attacks" (in menu page "controllers 2") offers the first important support. For the "spiccato" you should avoid the "marcato" attack triggered by CC38>64 (so the cc38 has to be lower than 64, but still high enough if you want it aggressive)
> 
> - the cc26 "attack time" (in menu page Controllers 1) will help as well: it shapes the start and the connection between notes, and can make a legato and/or portamento more or less long interacting with the velocity
> 
> - the cc22 "overtones" can be introduced to mimic the tone of the strong accents (again just a quick pick during the attack, then back to zero)
> 
> - note duration: very short note durations will trigger pure staccato samples without morphing into any sustain, and the cc27 "release time" can manage the length of the following resonance (you may shorten it if you want very sharp and dry staccato in a wet ambience and viceversa).
> 
> SUMMARIZING:
> - an aggressive staccato off the string or spiccato is played with very short duration, high velocity and high cc11, possibly with cc38>64
> - an aggressive staccato on the string is played in a similar way, but slightly longer duration and cc38>64
> Other parameters are available for fine-tuning and increasing variety and realism.



This is a great summary about how to get spiccato or staccato sound. I'd like to add that you have to keep in mind that with this kind of libraries, dynamics control the intensity of all the articulations. It is not like standard sample libraries were, by default, you control dynamics based on the articulation type, so generally you control it with CC1 for sustained or legato notes and with velocity for short ones.

Here the velocity has all a different kind of function and behavior because you almost don't have articulations that needs you to use ks and you do everything (almost everything) by directly playing it.

I didn't think about using overtones too in spiccatos, they actually make sense. I'll try to use them. Actually I'm only doing it on solo parts.

About the marcato/staccato separation using CC38 I already studied it in the manual but I found that in the piece I posted I got a more aggressive sound with higher CC38 values, higher velocity and attack almost to 0.

Obviously I'm also using short length notes. Maybe it is a combination of all this that gives me the sound. By using lower CC38 values I have less aggressive attacks.


----------



## gamma-ut

Fa said:


> Yes tremolo is a bit robotic out of the box, but if you "animate" it with the dynamic and the speed (cc19) it's enhanced dramatically: the logic of the developer was to make it "playable" and not just static, like all the other articulations of the SM instruments.



How much impact is CC19 meant to have on tremolo speed? I'm finding it's barely making any difference at all - very different to the effect on vibrato when the tremolo keyswitch isn't active.


----------



## Fa

DANIELE said:


> About the marcato/staccato separation using CC38 I already studied it in the manual but I found that in the piece I posted I got a more aggressive sound with higher CC38 values, higher velocity and attack almost to 0.
> 
> Obviously I'm also using short length notes. Maybe it is a combination of all this that gives me the sound. By using lower CC38 values I have less aggressive attacks.



Yes of course! The CC38 is actually activating the "marcato" attack that has a pretty strong sound, and beside the common marcato application (on-the-string accent morphing into sustain of whatever length) it's perfect to accentuate also shorts to get an aggressive sound: in real life the high bow pressure of the sforzato or fortissimo sounds pretty close to a marcato, and definitely less to a spiccato being usually more light and bouncing, so this simulation approach makes perfect sense to me from an acoustic point of view as well. But... anyway it works, that's the final point


----------



## EmmCeeSq

Fa said:


> To get the full potential and flexibility of this VI in the short/aggressive is not as intuitive as other articulations, but still the range of available sounds and colours is large and effective. Here some general rules to understand the logic and start experimenting:
> 
> - always remember that dynamic is a combination of the velocity+cc11, it's mandatory, but not enough to write/play high velocity, it inputs a fast attack time and trigger the initial aggressive part of staccatos, but then the cc11 has to be designed with a pick: the form of the cc11 curve will make the staccatos, marcatos and spiccatos emerge the way you want.
> 
> for accurate rendering of extreme articulations, never neglect auxiliary controllers:
> - the CC38 "attacks" (in menu page "controllers 2") offers the first important support. For the "spiccato" you should avoid the "marcato" attack triggered by CC38>64 (so the cc38 has to be lower than 64, but still high enough if you want it aggressive)
> 
> - the cc26 "attack time" (in menu page Controllers 1) will help as well: it shapes the start and the connection between notes, and can make a legato and/or portamento more or less long interacting with the velocity
> 
> - the cc22 "overtones" can be introduced to mimic the tone of the strong accents (again just a quick pick during the attack, then back to zero)
> 
> - note duration: very short note durations will trigger pure staccato samples without morphing into any sustain, and the cc27 "release time" can manage the length of the following resonance (you may shorten it if you want very sharp and dry staccato in a wet ambience and viceversa).
> 
> SUMMARIZING:
> - an aggressive staccato off the string or spiccato is played with very short duration, high velocity and high cc11, possibly with cc38>64
> - an aggressive staccato on the string is played in a similar way, but slightly longer duration and cc38>64
> Other parameters are available for fine-tuning and increasing variety and realism.



Great tips! I'm using a B/C, so CC11 is actually CC2 for me, but it's the same principle. I'm currently mapping in CC38 etc to Composer Tools Pro so it's easy to record in. I'll play with the overtones setting as well.

Thanks for all this, much appreciated!


----------



## DANIELE

Fa said:


> Yes of course! The CC38 is actually activating the "marcato" attack that has a pretty strong sound, and beside the common marcato application (on-the-string accent morphing into sustain of whatever length) it's perfect to accentuate also shorts to get an aggressive sound: in real life the high bow pressure of the sforzato or fortissimo sounds pretty close to a marcato, and definitely less to a spiccato being usually more light and bouncing, so this simulation approach makes perfect sense to me from an acoustic point of view as well. But... anyway it works, that's the final point



Ok, it makes sense. Exactly as I was thinking.

Thank you.


----------



## EmmCeeSq

Fa said:


> Yes tremolo is a bit robotic out of the box, but if you "animate" it with the dynamic and the speed (cc19) it's enhanced dramatically: the logic of the developer was to make it "playable" and not just static, like all the other articulations of the SM instruments.


Measured tremolo would also be a great addition. I bought the Audio Modeling Cello, which has it (I assume as do the rest of the A/M strings), and it's great.


----------



## Fa

gamma-ut said:


> How much impact is CC19 meant to have on tremolo speed? I'm finding it's barely making any difference at all - very different to the effect on vibrato when the tremolo keyswitch isn't active.


Well, being it designed to introduce subtle variations and not dramatic changes, the intended use is from 0 to 127 supporting for instance a climax with a crescendo and subtle accellerando and viceversa. 

Yes, even if sharing a common CC19 for convenience, it has nothing to do with vibrato rate, where you can get very wide rate changes.


----------



## DANIELE

EmmCeeSq said:


> Measured tremolo would also be a great addition. I bought the Audio Modeling Cello, which has it (I assume as do the rest of the A/M strings), and it's great.



You can just do it manually.


----------



## gamma-ut

Fa said:


> Well, being it designed to introduce subtle variations and not dramatic changes, the intended use is from 0 to 127 supporting for instance a climax with a crescendo and subtle accellerando and viceversa.
> 
> Yes, even if sharing a common CC19 for convenience, it has nothing to do with vibrato rate, where you can get very wide rate changes.



Thanks. I wasn't sure whether it was designed to handle the full range you might get or whether it's something you might use instead for a quick tremolo instead of handling it manually.

Do you have recommendations for a manual tremolo? I'm thinking CC11 together with a touch of short bursts of CC22 for overtones and the CC33 modulation.


----------



## EmmCeeSq

DANIELE said:


> You can just do it manually.


I'm sorry to bother you again for a full explanation (your last was super-helpful, thank you), but would you mind elaborating a little more on this? At a tempo of (say) 120 BPM, playing in semiquavers on a repeated note, using a controller keyboard is never going to be great. Am I misunderstanding you? Thanks again for the advice - been playing with those CCs you suggested earlier!


----------



## EmmCeeSq

Also, I'm finding the Cello and upper strings pizzicato's EXTREMELY unconvincing. Unusable, I'd say - they sound awful.
Be lovely for someone to tell me it's user error, but I think they sound really unrealistic.


----------



## DANIELE

EmmCeeSq said:


> I'm sorry to bother you again for a full explanation (your last was super-helpful, thank you), but would you mind elaborating a little more on this? At a tempo of (say) 120 BPM, playing in semiquavers on a repeated note, using a controller keyboard is never going to be great. Am I misunderstanding you? Thanks again for the advice - been playing with those CCs you suggested earlier!



No problem! To get measured tremolo you simply could use repeated and close short notes based on the type of measured tremolo you need. So maybe 1/8 short notes or 1/16 ones etc...since the measured tremolo use bow strokes synced with the time signature of your choice by definition.

After that you have to adjust the lenght of the notes until it sounds convincing.

Then you play with other CCs and velocity (same instruction used to get convincing short notes but tweaked to get a convincing measured tremolo) to get a realistic attack and release for every note.

It is more easier to try it that to explain it. I'm sorry if I'm not so clear here but I'm not mother language and maybe I'm not so able to be clear.

In a few words you have to draw every note instead of a longer one with a ks activated. But by doing this you have more freedom on controlling every single time the bow moves up and down.

I didn't tried but you could try with the re-bow CC64 control to see if you get a better result. In the track I posted before I use the technique I described here and it sounds well for me.


----------



## EmmCeeSq

DANIELE said:


> No problem! To get measured tremolo you simply could use repeated and close short notes based on the type of measured tremolo you need. So maybe 1/8 short notes or 1/16 ones etc...since the measured tremolo use bow strokes synced with the time signature of your choice by definition.
> 
> After that you have to adjust the lenght of the notes until it sounds convincing.
> 
> Then you play with other CCs and velocity (same instruction used to get convincing short notes but tweaked to get a convincing measured tremolo) to get a realistic attack and release for every note.
> 
> It is more easier to try it that to explain it. I'm sorry if I'm not so clear here but I'm not mother language and maybe I'm not so able to be clear.
> 
> In a few words you have to draw every note instead of a longer one with a ks activated. But by doing this you have more freedom on controlling every single time the bow moves up and down.
> 
> I didn't tried but you could try with the re-bow CC64 control to see if you get a better result. In the track I posted before I use the technique I described here and it sounds well for me.


That's great, thanks so much for taking the time! And don't worry, your English is much, much better than my <insert any language you like here> 
Very grateful, thanks again


----------



## I like music

EmmCeeSq said:


> Also, I'm finding the Cello and upper strings pizzicato's EXTREMELY unconvincing. Unusable, I'd say - they sound awful.
> Be lovely for someone to tell me it's user error, but I think they sound really unrealistic.



I wasn't convinced by the pizz. However, luckily, this is an area where I can just throw in CSS pizz, since at this point you're using keyswitches even with SM, so it doesn't make a huge difference to me. I actually haven't tried solo strings pizzicato. I can imagine finding an alternative for those more difficult.


----------



## EmmCeeSq

I like music said:


> I wasn't convinced by the pizz. However, luckily, this is an area where I can just throw in CSS pizz, since at this point you're using keyswitches even with SM, so it doesn't make a huge difference to me. I actually haven't tried solo strings pizzicato. I can imagine finding an alternative for those more difficult.


I'm currently blending it with my Spitfire Symphonic Strings Library - I'll report back, but so far, with a bit of careful placement, it works fine. I really need to get hold of CSS, though - I've seen how well the ensemble strings blend.

I'm not using the solo strings at all, TBH. I'm finding them extremely unconvincing. No big deal, the price was worth it for the ensembles, but the Audio Modelling solo instruments are streets ahead of the S/m (IMHO, of course).


----------



## I like music

EmmCeeSq said:


> I'm currently blending it with my Spitfire Symphonic Strings Library - I'll report back, but so far, with a bit of careful placement, it works fine. I really need to get hold of CSS, though - I've seen how well the ensemble strings blend.
> 
> I'm not using the solo strings at all, TBH. I'm finding them extremely unconvincing. No big deal, the price was worth it for the ensembles, but the Audio Modelling solo instruments are streets ahead of the S/m (IMHO, of course).



Interesting. I had the opposite view on AM vs SM as I've had both. That said, this is probably because I didn't spend nearly enough time on AM strings. I've heard others' demos where they've utilised all the tweakability on AM strings and made them sound very good.


----------



## EmmCeeSq

This stuff is all SO subjective! I only have the A/M cello, spent a day programming it (I run Composer Tools Pro with a breath controller, so I'm able to programme tonnes of MIDI in a single pass) but think it's amazing.


----------



## Eptesicus

Hows cpu usage on these?

Like is it feasible to have a whole section playing + other libraries etc?


----------



## EmmCeeSq

Not as brutal as I might have expected (a very pleasant surprise, I was expecting to have to run them as instrument tracks in Cubase and freeze them). I'm hosting them in VE Pro, and so far, so good!


----------



## Fa

EmmCeeSq said:


> I'm not using the solo strings at all, TBH. I'm finding them extremely unconvincing. No big deal, the price was worth it for the ensembles, but the Audio Modelling solo instruments are streets ahead of the S/m (IMHO, of course).



As you wrote later it's pretty subjective, I have to totally disagree on that. I really think it's just because you didn't enter in the requested amount of confidence to master Samplemodeling, but sorry, they are already street ahead of the A/M out of the box (IMHO, of course) 

This is not a fault of Audio Modeling, the opposite they did an amazing work with physical modeling, but the sound of the Samplemodeling is sampled, and keeps the real instrument identity, being closer to real than the amazing but always too thin and synthy sound of physical modeling.

I would recommend to you, just because you own the instruments already, to spend a little time playing a bit with the Samplemodeling Violin for instance, the way you did with A/M cello. You will be surprised in my opinion (unless you look for electric-pop-keyboard sound, where of course A/M is more versatile being synthetic).


----------



## philippe goi

I thank the musicians who appreciated my baroque demonstration!
Attached the midi file so you can try it and test your configuration.
I use a keyboard and the Tecontrol ( USB Breath and Bite 2 controller ) for programming in
real time , then all the Ccs allow to refine and make sound sculpture .
Programming strings is not easy thing , it really takes time to put
in the form of the sound line , each note , each attack , vibrato , vibrato speed , duration must
be checked as much as possible .
A good approach and test short melodic phrases with different game techniques .
We must also observe how real musicians play in a string quartet
many videos on youtube are very revealing .
I consider this instrument very innovative and prommeteur for the following , I think the team
Samplemodeling will bring us some nice updates .
Concerning the whole pizzs this sounds a little straight , maybe it would be possible to sample small string sets with a resonance and a more natural sound dispersion ...
Thanks to FA for its explanations on the controls , an idea would be to create small video tutorials explaining each game technique ( legato , detached , tremolo , stacc , vibrato ...) by observing the control curves .


----------



## Fa

EmmCeeSq said:


> I've just bought this library. (v1.1) I've found some problematic artifacts between notes G4 and Bb4 (I'd love for someone else to try it, I've got no way of knowing whether this is just on my system). A strange clicking sound on the attack portion of notes.
> 
> Secondly, I'm finding that harmonics don't play back properly (I've only tested the 1st violin ensemble so far) - the harmonic plays, but the fundamental remains, albeit around 50% volume.
> 
> I'd like to know how much of this (if any) is user error. I've reported the artifacts to the developer, ...
> 
> Be really grateful for some advice/opinions.



Giorgio shared with me the result of the analysis made after your request and he confirmed that the problem was on your system side: the instrument doesn't produce the artifacts you reported (that were audible in your recording) and there is no subharmonic in the "harmonics" sound (it was not visible in the recordings, and it's perhaps due to audiosystem or acoustics artifacts). 

So we think it was just occasional and fixed or fixable on your side.

Please find results in the attachment (spectral analysis of the 3 notes and of the harmonics):


----------



## EmmCeeSq

Fa said:


> Giorgio shared with me the result of the analysis made after your request and he confirmed that the problem was on your system side: the instrument doesn't produce the artifacts you reported (that were audible in your recording) and there is no subharmonic in the "harmonics" sound (it was not visible in the recordings, and it's perhaps due to audiosystem or acoustics artifacts).
> 
> So we think it was just occasional and fixed or fixable on your side.
> 
> Please find results in the attachment (spectral analysis of the 3 notes and of the harmonics):


It is! I have NO idea what I did to fix it. But it's fixed. Thanks for the help!!


----------



## EmmCeeSq

Fa said:


> As you wrote later it's pretty subjective, I have to totally disagree on that. I really think it's just because you didn't enter in the requested amount of confidence to master Samplemodeling, but sorry, they are already street ahead of the A/M out of the box (IMHO, of course)
> 
> This is not a fault of Audio Modeling, the opposite they did an amazing work with physical modeling, but the sound of the Samplemodeling is sampled, and keeps the real instrument identity, being closer to real than the amazing but always too thin and synthy sound of physical modeling.
> 
> I would recommend to you, just because you own the instruments already, to spend a little time playing a bit with the Samplemodeling Violin for instance, the way you did with A/M cello. You will be surprised in my opinion (unless you look for electric-pop-keyboard sound, where of course A/M is more versatile being synthetic).


Of course, I will, although I've been using the S/M Brass for years (it's my go-to library, and I love it), so I wonder if this is more of a taste thing than a 'I don't know how to use the library' thing. I'll try again when I have bit more time - As I said, I'm more than happy with the ensemble sounds (this stuff is the future!) and it's incredibly playable. Thanks for all the help


----------



## Fa

EmmCeeSq said:


> Of course, I will, although I've been using the S/M Brass for years (it's my go-to library, and I love it), so I wonder if this is more of a taste thing than a 'I don't know how to use the library' thing. I'll try again when I have bit more time - As I said, I'm more than happy with the ensemble sounds (this stuff is the future!) and it's incredibly playable. Thanks for all the help



You are very welcome, and yes, no intention of being disrespectful of your experience/skill: it can definitely be a matter of pure preference/taste. But I had (and still have) the suspect that if you loved SM Brass and AM Cello, you will love SM solo strings as well, just finding the secrets to force them to your favorite sound (e.g. exploring body IRs is crucial, they can change dramatically the sound, as fine tuning the CC response of the external controllers etc.) Have fun anyway!


----------



## x-dfo

I was just goofing around trying manual vs. keyswitched tremolo on the violin ensemble and I found that I can't actually trigger the keyswitch, I tried E0, short duration, high velocity to latch it and it doesn't recognize the message.


----------



## x-dfo

Ah E2 worked, even though the manual states B0-C2 for violins.


----------



## x-dfo

Anyway, the tremolo keyswitch doesn't sound quite as good as doing it manually and fiddling with the various CC's, I think it needs a bit of work to do the job as it is. But deep in a mix, it may not matter.


----------



## Fa

x-dfo said:


> Ah E2 worked, even though the manual states B0-C2 for violins.


 yes: E0 of course doesn't work because it's out of the B0-C2 range. A working E2 instead of E1 is probably due to the usual mismatch between the C3 or C4 standard for central C.


----------



## x-dfo

Fa said:


> yes: E0 of course doesn't work because it's out of the B0-C2 range. A working E2 instead of E1 is probably due to the usual mismatch between the C3 or C4 standard for central C.


oh haha right, I did the range wrong in my head


----------



## DANIELE

EmmCeeSq said:


> Of course, I will, although I've been using the S/M Brass for years (it's my go-to library, and I love it), so I wonder if this is more of a taste thing than a 'I don't know how to use the library' thing. I'll try again when I have bit more time - As I said, I'm more than happy with the ensemble sounds (this stuff is the future!) and it's incredibly playable. Thanks for all the help



Believe me, while in some ways it will always be a matter of taste, this library needs time to be mastered but once you start to do it you could feel how much deeper it is. It has some things to adjust maybe (they will continue to support and update it) but between 1.0.1 and 1.1 it was a huge step and once you understand how to use it you find the huge amount of option at your disposal, you can literally shape the sound at your pleasure.
I love the solos and lately I managed to get very good results from them.

While it shares some basics with the brass I think this is a different kind of thing, strings are very different from brass (captain obvious here) so under the hood many things happens differently. Maybe try to think that you have to start from scratch with SM Strings and slowly explore all the possibilities. I mean, what library let you shape a tremolo manually???


----------



## muziksculp

philippe goi said:


> an idea would be to create small video tutorials explaining each game technique ( legato , detached , tremolo , stacc , vibrato ...) by observing the control curves .



Yes, Specialized Video Tutorials that focus on specific functionalities of this library will be great, and super helpful, to make it much easier, and clearer how to use it.


----------



## muziksculp

EmmCeeSq said:


> This stuff is all SO subjective! I only have the A/M cello, spent a day programming it (I run Composer Tools Pro with a breath controller, so I'm able to programme tonnes of MIDI in a single pass) but think it's amazing.



@EmmCeeSq

Hi,

A bit of an off topic question. How do you like using 'Composer Tools Pro" ? 

I'm thinking about buying it, it's on sale right now, although I use Studio One Pro 4 (Windows), I don't need it for DAW controls, but mostly for Libraries, i.e articulation switching. Do you recommend it ? is it easy to setup and use ? Can I make my own custom library key-switch assignments ? I plan to use it with an iPad Pro.

Thanks,
Muziksculp


----------



## Eptesicus

Im so torn about these. Very tempted but the demos are all over the place. I listen to one and think "wow" and then listen to the next and think "eurgh"

For example it sounds brilliant at this point in this mock up (1.46)- 

Till about 2.30 then that passage sounds a bit naff (the top violins).


----------



## x-dfo

Eptesicus said:


> Im so torn about these. Very tempted but the demos are all over the place. I listen to one and think "wow" and then listen to the next and think "eurgh"
> 
> For example it sounds brilliant at this point in this mock up (1.46)-
> 
> Till about 2.30 then that passage sounds a bit naff (the top violins).



I think it's more of an EQ/Mixing issue than a SM issue there.


----------



## EmmCeeSq

muziksculp said:


> @EmmCeeSq
> 
> Hi,
> 
> A bit of an off topic question. How do you like using 'Composer Tools Pro" ?
> 
> I'm thinking about buying it, it's on sale right now, although I use Studio One Pro 4 (Windows), I don't need it for DAW controls, but mostly for Libraries, i.e articulation switching. Do you recommend it ? is it easy to setup and use ? Can I make my own custom library key-switch assignments ? I plan to use it with an iPad Pro.
> 
> Thanks,
> Muziksculp


A lot! I wish it could be a bit simpler to set up, setting it up for each new instrument takes a long time. And I f**king hate Lemur. But CTP is a wonderful product - it's a huge workflow enancer.


----------



## muziksculp

EmmCeeSq said:


> A lot! I wish it could be a bit simpler to set up, setting it up for each new instrument takes a long time. And I f**king hate Lemur. But CTP is a wonderful product - it's a huge workflow enancer.



Thanks for the feedback. 

I actually asked the developer if CTP supports Studio One Pro 4, and he replied that it will work, but the Recall feature will not, the Recall feature is really nice, since it synchronizes the selected track in the DAW with the preset on the iPad, this Recall feature is not supported for Studio One Pro 4. But I think I can live with just the key-switching functionality of CTP. 

Now... Back to our topic.


----------



## Fa

muziksculp said:


> Yes, Specialized Video Tutorials that focus on specific functionalities of this library will be great, and super helpful, to make it much easier, and clearer how to use it.



I think you are absolutely right, and several users and supporters, were asking the same: that's why now after some time and hard work of tutorial makers, *quite a lot of material is available on line!*

I told Giorgio that in my very humble opinion SM can improve a bit the visibility of it, and he committed to doing it: he told me that a work of maintenance of the web-site is under way, so perhaps SM will find the time to find also space for improvement.


----------



## I like music

Fa said:


> I think you are absolutely right, and several users and supporters, were asking the same: that's why now after some time and hard work of tutorial makers, *quite a lot of material is available on line!*
> 
> I told Giorgio that in my very humble opinion SM can improve a bit the visibility of it, and he committed to doing it: he told me that a work of maintenance of the web-site is under way, so perhaps SM will find the time to find also space for improvement.


Somewhat agreed. True that there is a lot more online now in the way of tutorials. And they've launched their own YouTube channel. 

Only thing I wish for is a 'tips and tricks' sort of focus in future tutorials (and best practise).


----------



## decredis

(I've posted this query on the SM forum, but I thought maybe there might be more people here who may know if these are either known bugs or something I'm missing...) 

REMAPPING TREMOLO RATE: CC19 by default controls both vibrato rate and (when tremolo is activated) tremolo rate, I think. When I remap CC19 to CC1 (with nothing else mapped to CC1), this successfully remaps vibrato rate, but tremolo rate is still only controlled by CC19. Am I missing something to remap tremolo rate?

VIBRATO INTENSITY KNOB: Also when I remap vibrato intensity to CC11, this works fine, and the label "CC11" appears correctly next to the vibrato intensity knob, and turning the knob on the GUI works, and inputting CC11 from my expression pedal also works, *but* inputting CC11 by pedal is not reflected in the knob's position being updated in the GUI. (Unlike all other knobs, which do update when CC is inputted).

I am loving these instruments, by the way, and have much to learn... I am currently making my first attempt at a mock-up (not just with this, but with anything) of a Ravel string quartet using these instruments and, well, my attempt is naive and amateurish but it's great fun.


----------



## Woodie1972

I'm running into the same problem with the brass library: changing parameters like CC25, CC26 & CC29 does effect the sound, but is not always reflected in the UI. Sometimes it is, sometimes not and I can't replicate it. 
Changing CC11 or CC1 is reflected though, so this must be something under te hood.
Hopefully someone knows how to work this out.


----------



## Eptesicus

So i took the plunge and bought these as they are on sale (and from what they have said, they dont normally have sales). I have semi bought them in the hope that this is genuinally the only sale they will have and that they will improve them further as promised.

Fairly impressed so far. It certainly isn't perfect and like with all things there is room for improvement, but there is some useful stuff here.

A few observations initially -

- With work, no doubt it can be massively more expressive than other string libraries i have

- lowering the vibrato delay makes things feel much more natural without having to move the mod wheel al the time, otherwise you get this static lifeless vibrato envelope at the start of every note

- Using the bow changes/detach mode is paramount to it sounding more realistic.

- The cello ensemble still needs a lot of work in my opinion. Especially the large ensemble size. It sounds very phasey and is almost unusable. Must be fixed! Also, sometimes, especially with multiple notes it sounds a bit harpsichord like. The low register is very nice, but the top register is not great.

- Vibrato rate doesn't make any difference to the tremelo speed as far as i can see and generally tremolos need improving

On first impressions its quite good, but even though the cellos have been updated, they still need a lot of work!


----------



## I like music

Eptesicus said:


> So i took the plunge and bought these as they are on sale (and from what they have said, they dont normally have sales). I have semi bought them in the hope that this is genuinally the only sale they will have and that they will improve them further as promised.
> 
> Fairly impressed so far. It certainly isn't perfect and like with all things there is room for improvement, but there is some useful stuff here.
> 
> A few observations initially -
> 
> - With work, no doubt it can be massively more expressive than other string libraries i have
> 
> - lowering the vibrato delay makes things feel much more natural without having to move the mod wheel al the time, otherwise you get this static lifeless vibrato envelope at the start of every note
> 
> - Using the bow changes/detach mode is paramount to it sounding more realistic.
> 
> - The cello ensemble still needs a lot of work in my opinion. Especially the large ensemble size. It sounds very phasey and is almost unusable. Must be fixed! Also, sometimes, especially with multiple notes it sounds a bit harpsichord like. The low register is very nice, but the top register is not great.
> 
> - Vibrato rate doesn't make any difference to the tremelo speed as far as i can see and generally tremolos need improving
> 
> On first impressions its quite good, but even though the cellos have been updated, they still need a lot of work!



Hey! You finally bought it 

Detache mode was absolutely paramount, agreed. I wasn't getting the results I wanted until I started using this properly. I guess I was conditioned by my other libraries to not use string libraries this way.

On the Cello ensembles, I did wonder if it was just me. I hear this zing (waaaooooweeeewaaaaooo type of thing) which I wasn't convinced by.

Other than this, great libraries. I hadn't looked at the vibrato delay setting. This is the offset, right? How does it work? e.g. if I drew a single line at a vibrato of 100, and then put the delay on, it would simply take x milliseconds for the vibrato to ramp up to that value at each note?


----------



## Eptesicus

Another thing - how are you supposed to automate ensemble parameters if you have to synchronize the ensemble every time you make a change?


----------



## I like music

Eptesicus said:


> Another thing - how are you supposed to automate ensemble parameters if you have to synchronize the ensemble every time you make a change?


Only have to synchronize if you make the change directly in kontakt.


----------



## Eptesicus

I like music said:


> Only have to synchronize if you make the change directly in kontakt.



Oh ok. I thought it must be something like that!

So automation in your sequencer is fine and doesnt need sychronizing?


----------



## I like music

Eptesicus said:


> Oh ok. I thought it must be something like that!
> 
> So automation in your sequencer is fine and doesnt need sychronizing?


Exactly. And for this reason if I want to make a sort of template change (eg I just now applied that legato delay you talked about) I just did it via the cc Lane in cubase and pasted the track to all my instruments as this way I didn't have to do the tedious sync thing). 

So yeah, via sequencer it doesn't need it.


----------



## lychee

Hi everyone.

First of all I hope you are doing well in this particularly sad period.

Then to start again in a slightly more joyful tone, I am finally the owner of this famous plugin, and after having tested the beast on old compositions, I would like to ask you a question.

Have any of you tried a divisi script on an ensemble patch?

I wanted to play the legato parts of an ensemble while having control of each instrument of this group.
So I separated the four parts of the multi instrument into four separate midi channels to be able to control them with a divisi script.
The problem is that it gives me weird stuff with sound and I don't understand how to make it work properly (well if it's possible).

So, would someone more experienced have tried it, or could you give it a try and tell me what to do?


----------



## I like music

lychee said:


> Hi everyone.
> 
> First of all I hope you are doing well in this particularly sad period.
> 
> Then to start again in a slightly more joyful tone, I am finally the owner of this famous plugin, and after having tested the beast on old compositions, I would like to ask you a question.
> 
> Have any of you tried a divisi script on an ensemble patch?
> 
> I wanted to play the legato parts of an ensemble while having control of each instrument of this group.
> So I separated the four parts of the multi instrument into four separate midi channels to be able to control them with a divisi script.
> The problem is that it gives me weird stuff with sound and I don't understand how to make it work properly (well if it's possible).
> 
> So, would someone more experienced have tried it, or could you give it a try and tell me what to do?


I think someone experienced tried this very thing before and posted about it on the forum. The conclusion was that this was not possible to do without completely destroying the sound.


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

lychee said:


> Hi everyone.
> 
> First of all I hope you are doing well in this particularly sad period.
> 
> Then to start again in a slightly more joyful tone, I am finally the owner of this famous plugin, and after having tested the beast on old compositions, I would like to ask you a question.
> 
> Have any of you tried a divisi script on an ensemble patch?
> 
> I wanted to play the legato parts of an ensemble while having control of each instrument of this group.
> So I separated the four parts of the multi instrument into four separate midi channels to be able to control them with a divisi script.
> The problem is that it gives me weird stuff with sound and I don't understand how to make it work properly (well if it's possible).
> 
> So, would someone more experienced have tried it, or could you give it a try and tell me what to do?



lychee,

the ensembles cannot, and must not, be split. They only work as a multi. For divisi please use two instances of the multi, for example Violins I and II.

Best,

Giorgio


----------



## Eptesicus

Did a little chamber rendition of Leave No Man Behind from Black Hawk Down for my first play with the library this afternoon.

i do like how intimate and delicate a sound you can get.

This isn't perfect and needs more work but it is a fairly pleasant sound i think. This is purely sample modeling strings and a snare drum.

You certainly have to work for the expression but you can make a much more unique sound/performance compared to traditional libraries.


----------



## decredis

Been really enjoying these strings, although I have an awful lot to learn. They've inspired me to make my very first attempt at a mock-up of a proper piece of music. This is my first stab at the first 30 bars of Ravel's quartet in F, please forgive a newbie hobbyist's immense inadequacy...


----------



## Eptesicus

Done a bit more to the Black Hawk Down piece i'm testing these on.

Mostly pretty happy with these strings. I sort of which there was a more defined/expressive vibrato in the ensemble patches. I think if they can introduce this in an update it would make the library even better. At the moment the ensemble vibrato is a bit mushy (i'm thinking of something more like soaring strings).

The solo instruments are very usable and you can really get a performance out of them (far beyond the solo instruments from other traditional libraries). Sort of feels like you are making it more your own instead of relying on baked in vibrato and expression etc.

Edit - made some further mixing adjustments


----------



## Fa

Eptesicus said:


> Done a bit more to the Black Hawk Down piece i'm testing these on.
> 
> Mostly pretty happy with these strings. I sort of which there was a more defined/expressive vibrato in the ensemble patches. I think if they can introduce this in an update it would make the library even better. At the moment the ensemble vibrato is a bit mushy (i'm thinking of something more like soaring strings).
> 
> The solo instruments are very usable and you can really get a performance out of them (far beyond the solo instruments from other traditional libraries). Sort of feels like you are making it more your own instead of relying on baked in vibrato and expression etc.
> 
> Edit - made some further mixing adjustments



There is a learning curve, because the instrument is very powerful and has a lot of functions to sculpt the sound at your will, and you have to learn some of them... but as you can see, the learning is fast, and the results arrive soon, while you practice and experiment a bit. 

The vibrato is very flexible but again, needs some know-how and experiments:
- for little ensemble you may force the "expressive vibrato" cc99 to larger value (e.g. 45 to 80 according your needs) for larger ensemble the expressive vibrato works better to lower values (e.g. 20 to 50), because high values introduces some excessive effect for large sections.

- the expressive vibrato knob cc99 is not supposed to be automated and moved so much: it's a kind of trim, and the automation has to focus on cc1 instead as usual.

- for small ensemble with high expressive vibrato the vibrato rate cc19 can be set to "normal" values (e.g. 60 to 80) while for large ensembles with low expressive vibrato, the effect of cc19 is very limited and so it's better to keep it low (e.g. round 30)

- for cc1, (vibrato depth) but even more for cc19 (vibrato rate) and cc99 (expressive vibrato) the extreme values (e.g. over 85) are intended only for sporadic and climax use, they are available for reproducing extreme effects, and not the normal play.

- the vibrato delay is really requested only for audition purpose when you play without vibrato controller, and you want to get an automatic onset of the vibrato, but when you play live controlling cc1 and/or you program it into sequencer lane, the vibrato delay can be reduced a lot (5 to 12) or even simply to set to zero. (it get automatically excluded by rapid cc1 variations, but to avoid interference when you design more delicate variations of cc1, you MUST exclude it setting it to 0)

Try experimenting with my suggestions above, and everything will be more clear (definitely easier to try and play, than describe and explain). I'm sure you will have fun, and find several of the sounds you didn't find at the beginning.


----------



## DANIELE

Eptesicus said:


> Done a bit more to the Black Hawk Down piece i'm testing these on.
> 
> Mostly pretty happy with these strings. I sort of which there was a more defined/expressive vibrato in the ensemble patches. I think if they can introduce this in an update it would make the library even better. At the moment the ensemble vibrato is a bit mushy (i'm thinking of something more like soaring strings).
> 
> The solo instruments are very usable and you can really get a performance out of them (far beyond the solo instruments from other traditional libraries). Sort of feels like you are making it more your own instead of relying on baked in vibrato and expression etc.
> 
> Edit - made some further mixing adjustments



I seen that movie a lot of times...you bring in me a really strong nostalgia effect. 

I'm composing a Star Wars inspired track, I'll post it once it is done. It still requires a lot of work.


----------



## Eptesicus

DANIELE said:


> I seen that movie a lot of times...you bring in me a really strong nostalgia effect.



I know right! Might watch it tomorrow.

One of Zimmers best soundtracks in my opinion.


----------



## Fa

Eptesicus said:


> - The cello ensemble still needs a lot of work ... low register is very nice, but the top register is not great.



In general the problem with Cellos is they cover a pretty critical and wide range of frequencies: often to make them uniform the libraries tend to "smooth" and make them darker. In the case of Samplemodeling it's a different approach; you get a range of different Body IR, and it can make A LOT of difference:

- did you explore the cc100 function in the Controllers 4 menu page? (just over the ensemble size) you may select different body IR corresponding to very different colours, some better for lower range, some for the upper, and some more neutral. (please notice you can change it only before starting play, and in Ensemble you are requested pressing "synchronize" button after the selection)

- after you find the appropriate colour with cc100, then move to finding your favorite cc95 ensemble size value, and set the expressive vibrato accordingly (lower or zero for large, and 45 to 80 for small). Then start to play as usual  (I mean using velocity cc11 and cc1 to shape the sound expression in real time)


----------



## x-dfo

Fa said:


> In general the problem with Cellos is they cover a pretty critical and wide range of frequencies: often to make them uniform the libraries tend to "smooth" and make them darker. In the case of Samplemodeling it's a different approach; you get a range of different Body IR, and it can make A LOT of difference:
> 
> - did you explore the cc100 function in the Controllers 4 menu page? (just over the ensemble size) you may select different body IR corresponding to very different colours, some better for lower range, some for the upper, and some more neutral. (please notice you can change it only before starting play, and in Ensemble you are requested pressing "synchronize" button after the selection)
> 
> - after you find the appropriate colour with cc100, then move to finding your favorite cc95 ensemble size value, and set the expressive vibrato accordingly (lower or zero for large, and 45 to 80 for small). Then start to play as usual  (I mean using velocity cc11 and cc1 to shape the sound expression in real time)


Does anyone know what the body values of cc100 represent? 1s, 2s, 3s, 4m, 5m, Sord s (quiet?), Sord m


----------



## Fa

x-dfo said:


> Does anyone know what the body values of cc100 represent? 1s, 2s, 3s, 4m, 5m, Sord s (quiet?), Sord m


1 2 3... just to select. 

s = stereo IR m=mono IR (not mono signal, just the IR is mono, then it's processed stereo by the rest of the chain) the s type are a bit more wide, and m type a bit more compact/uniform.

Sord = sordino (the special string mute)

Often the IR are arranged from dark to bright, but this is not a consistent rule... (it seems the developers introduced a bit of pure creative randomness to the way they named IRs... LOL )


----------



## x-dfo

Fa said:


> 1 2 3... just to select.
> 
> s = stereo IR m=mono IR (not mono signal, just the IR is mono, then it's processed stereo by the rest of the chain) the s type are a bit more wide, and m type a bit more compact/uniform.
> 
> Sord = sordino (the special string mute)
> 
> Often the IR are arranged from dark to bright, but this is not a consistent rule... (it seems the developers introduced a bit of pure creative randomness to the way they named IRs... LOL )


Thanks for clarifying!


----------



## x-dfo

Oh yeah, I meant to ask this last week - is there a way to do flautando playing?


----------



## DANIELE

x-dfo said:


> Oh yeah, I meant to ask this last week - is there a way to do flautando playing?



Simply play them at very low dynamics.


----------



## Eptesicus

In regard to the virtual soundstage, would you recommend turning all these parameters to zero if you are using your own reverb/spacialization plugin?


----------



## DANIELE

Eptesicus said:


> In regard to the virtual soundstage, would you recommend turning all these parameters to zero if you are using your own reverb/spacialization plugin?



I turned them all off since I use my own spatialization plugin. If you turn them on and you also use the plugin you will hear a big mess with the audio signal (as you could obviously expect).


----------



## Eptesicus

One other question -

To make divisi ensembles, can you just combine two Violin 1 small or medium ensembles and just have each one with a different IR (ie one set to 1 and one set to 2) to avoid phasing but create a dvisi section to replicate a large section? What i mean is, can you play them in unison without issue? I have been experimenting and it seems to work fine, but im worried im making a rookie mistake?


----------



## DANIELE

Eptesicus said:


> One other question -
> 
> To make divisi ensembles, can you just combine two Violin 1 small or medium ensembles and just have each one with a different IR (ie one set to 1 and one set to 2) to avoid phasing but create a dvisi section to replicate a large section? What i mean is, can you play them in unison without issue? I have been experimenting and it seems to work fine, but im worried im making a rookie mistake?



You should do some more randomization. I did some testing and I experienced some little bit of phasing. I think you shouldn't hear it in an orchestral context.
Anyway I use divisi very rarely to unison purposes, I use it more to make chords and it works great.

Sometimes I do chords with one instrument only, in the same track and it sounds great aswell.

You could try to detune each ensemble a little bit and maybe you could add some different delays on every track to separate more the performances of multiple tracks playing in unison.

Stacking solo instruments is more complex, there I heard a little bit more phasing issues even with the randomization I talked about.
But usually I don't need to layer solos so I'm good with that for now. I'll keep testing while I'm composing.


----------



## Fa

Eptesicus said:


> One other question -
> 
> To make divisi ensembles, can you just combine two Violin 1 small or medium ensembles and just have each one with a different IR (ie one set to 1 and one set to 2) to avoid phasing but create a dvisi section to replicate a large section? What i mean is, can you play them in unison without issue? I have been experimenting and it seems to work fine, but im worried im making a rookie mistake?



In addition to the good comments of Daniele, I would say:

- the instances of the multi ensemble are designed to work in unison, without phasing, but as you may expect, the best result are coming from the highest possible differentiation (e.g. different values of cc100 body IR, different vibrato, different attack time etc.). Using Violins I and Violins II can help, but is not mandatory (you can use 2 instances of Violins I and 2 of Violins II, cross combine/mix them etc.)

- the cc95 allows for a good divisi effects for chords without the need of creating more instances: during the chord or polyphonic legato just send very low cc95 (0 to 30) and then turn it back to your original large section value ( so more than 70) during unison.

- only when pretty different articulations, portamento, vibrato and fine legato are requested in a divisi polyphonic phrase, you must split the part in 2 different instances of course (so you will be able of differentiating whatever articulation and parameter you want in each of the divisi groups).


----------



## lychee

Eptesicus said:


> One other question -
> 
> To make divisi ensembles, can you just combine two Violin 1 small or medium ensembles and just have each one with a different IR (ie one set to 1 and one set to 2) to avoid phasing but create a dvisi section to replicate a large section? What i mean is, can you play them in unison without issue? I have been experimenting and it seems to work fine, but im worried im making a rookie mistake?



Obviously the question of the divisi seems important for me as for others.

If I can suggest an idea to the SM developers for future updates, it would be to provide a divisi version of the ensembles, or to make separate instruments with the same parameters as an ensemble (violins 1 to 8 for example), like that each one could create his orchestra as he wishes.


----------



## DANIELE

Fa said:


> - the cc95 allows for a good divisi effects for chords without the need of creating more instances: during the chord or polyphonic legato just send very low cc95 (0 to 30) and then turn it back to your original large section value ( so more than 70) during unison.
> 
> - only when pretty different articulations, portamento, vibrato and fine legato are requested in a divisi polyphonic phrase, you must split the part in 2 different instances of course (so you will be able of differentiating whatever articulation and parameter you want in each of the divisi groups).



Exactly how I work with divisi.

For the most part divisi makes chords or similar parallel figures so it is more efficient to have all of them in one track. If you need very different lines then you will split the track. I have 3 track for every ensemble and I rarely use two of them for every ensemble.



lychee said:


> Obviously the question of the divisi seems important for me as for others.
> 
> If I can suggest an idea to the SM developers for future updates, it would be to provide a divisi version of the ensembles, or to make separate instruments with the same parameters as an ensemble (violins 1 to 8 for example), like that each one could create his orchestra as he wishes.



You already can do this with CC95 as explained above by Fa.


----------



## lychee

DANIELE said:


> You already can do this with CC95 as explained above by Fa.



Sorry i post it without refreshing the page, so i did not see the Fa answer.

But CC95 not switch on or off the unison to allow chord and separate control of the four parts of the ensemble ?

See what i looking for in this exemple:


----------



## DANIELE

lychee said:


> Sorry i post it without refreshing the page, so i did not see the Fa answer.
> 
> But CC95 not switch on or off the unison to allow chord and separate control of the four parts of the ensemble ?
> 
> See what i looking for in this exemple:




I don't know how exactly the library works under the hood but from what I know CC95 is the ensemble size so you don't have to focus on the tracks you are seeing in the multi (this is the solution that SM found for the ensembles) but on the dimension of the overall ensemble, so technically the number of players that are playing.

Fa was telling you that since you are doubling the notes played you should cut to half the ensemble size to have a balanced divisi sound. It is very easy to do and you will set CC 95 accordingly to what seems right to you.


----------



## Eptesicus

Personally having played with this all day i think the medium/large ensembles are pretty phasey. I hope they fix/improve that in coming updates.


----------



## x-dfo

Eptesicus said:


> Personally having played with this all day i think the medium/large ensembles are pretty phasey. I hope they fix/improve that in coming updates.


Agreed, right now I"m layering - the ensemble has this 'illusory' size thing going on that's a bit weird compared to playing ensemble strings in sampled libraries. It's like it sounds like more than 1 player but not 'real' players. Hard to explain.


----------



## Eptesicus

x-dfo said:


> Agreed, right now I"m layering - the ensemble has this 'illusory' size thing going on that's a bit weird compared to playing ensemble strings in sampled libraries. It's like it sounds like more than 1 player but not 'real' players. Hard to explain.




I find the small size is good. Medium and large sizes can get pretty phasey a the high dynamics i think.

I really hope this is something they will improve


----------



## robgb

Eptesicus said:


> Personally having played with this all day i think the medium/large ensembles are pretty phasey. I hope they fix/improve that in coming updates.


Can you post an example of this? I'm not noticing any phaseyness.


----------



## Fa

lychee said:


> Sorry i post it without refreshing the page, so i did not see the Fa answer.
> 
> But CC95 not switch on or off the unison to allow chord and separate control of the four parts of the ensemble ?
> 
> See what i looking for in this exemple:



No, it doesn't. To be very honest I don't know what the video is showing, but it seems to be very specific script for LASS, and the way LASS is designed. (auto-routing notes to LASS instances, being independent little groups of players).

Generic scripts are not applicable to SM Strings, because they work with and only with the internal scripts, by the way.

CC95 is "ensemble size" and works (with proprietary technology) ONLY on building up or downsizing the perceived dimension of the unison. To disable monophonic and engage poly, you have to use KS C# (but only if polyphonic movements are requested by divisi: for simple homophonic/chords the mono is enough).

of course if your cc95 ensemble size is "Large", when you play chords the result is not a divisi but a gigantic build-up (full section for each note). To properly mimic divisi chords you must downsize temporarily the ensemble using the cc95 as I described before.

This is NOT meaning that it has any "auto-divisi" driving/routing the sound to single modules of the contact Multi, because they are NOT designed to play alone. The proprietary technology of SM strings is based on manipulating sound acoustic components in real time and then merging them for the final effect, so each module can't play without the others (if it did, it created only strange incomplete sounds representing acoustic fraction of the full real sound, not a smaller amount of players).


----------



## Fa

x-dfo said:


> Agreed, right now I"m layering - the ensemble has this 'illusory' size thing going on that's a bit weird compared to playing ensemble strings in sampled libraries. It's like it sounds like more than 1 player but not 'real' players. Hard to explain.



I think you perceive something we often discuss, they are pretty silky and smooth, and yes developers are working to improve it.

It's a collateral effect of the technology, but the technology enables a sound pretty close to the library, and without any of the libraries limitations:

- a single sustain of a library is nice and textured, can sound better than SM, but as soon as you start crossfading dynamic layers and articulations the magic disappear: the library will have something fake and weird due to the pulsating 14 to 28 to 14 to 28 players during cross fades; the library will just reproduce a single vibrato style and envelope, and crossfading vibrato layers is even more weird: you just add to 14 players playing low vibrato some more 14 players playing intense vibrato... nothing to do with a real section of players modulating vibrato in real time.

- well: actually SM strings instead, can modulate articulations and dynamic and vibrato in real time with a consistent and natural sound, including the transitions, thanks to the special technology, unfortunately smoothing a bit the texture of the sound, as you noticed.

For the reason above, the SM strings HAVE TO be modulated (with controllers) in real time to be live and natural: if you keep flat sustains without expression they don't provide the intended sound, and of course this is not their purpose, but the library purpose instead.


----------



## x-dfo

Fa said:


> I think you perceive something we often discuss, they are pretty silky and smooth, and yes developers are working to improve it.
> 
> It's a collateral effect of the technology, but the technology enables a sound pretty close to the library, and without any of the libraries limitations:
> 
> - a single sustain of a library is nice and textured, can sound better than SM, but as soon as you start crossfading dynamic layers and articulations the magic disappear: the library will have something fake and weird due to the pulsating 14 to 28 to 14 to 28 players during cross fades; the library will just reproduce a single vibrato style and envelope, and crossfading vibrato layers is even more weird: you just add to 14 players playing low vibrato some more 14 players playing intense vibrato... nothing to do with a real section of players modulating vibrato in real time.
> 
> - well: actually SM strings instead, can modulate articulations and dynamic and vibrato in real time with a consistent and natural sound, including the transitions, thanks to the special technology, unfortunately smoothing a bit the texture of the sound, as you noticed.
> 
> For the reason above, the SM strings HAVE TO be modulated (with controllers) in real time to be live and natural: if you keep flat sustains without expression they don't provide the intended sound, and of course this is not their purpose, but the library purpose instead.


Agreed, which is why I bought it! It's really a great product, and it's super fun to play.


----------



## muziksculp

Fa said:


> I think you perceive something we often discuss, they are pretty silky and smooth, and yes developers are working to improve it.



@Fa ,

Hi,

I Just wanted to double check on this important detail, Did you mean that Sample Modeling are working to improve this (The Ensemble Sound) ? 

Sometimes having string ensembles sound too silky, and smooth can make them sound more like a synth-string-pad, rather than real players. So, the amount/degree of silky-smooth character is an important factor, if you go over a certain threshold, you break the realism. 

Cheers,
Muziksculp


----------



## Fa

muziksculp said:


> @Fa ,
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I Just wanted to double check on this important detail, Did you mean that Sample Modeling are working to improve this (The Ensemble Sound) ?
> 
> Sometimes having string ensembles sound too silky, and smooth can make them sound more like a synth-string-pad, rather than real players. So, the amount/degree of silky-smooth character is an important factor, if you go over a certain threshold, you break the realism.
> 
> Cheers,
> Muziksculp



Hi Muz,
being not a developer, nor part of SampleModeling company, I can't tell you if and when an improvement will be possible, and so definitely I don't want to create any expectation.

What I can confirm is the following:

- the topic has been discussed several time by several people, and is pretty well known by developers. They are continuously running research (mostly scientific research, the background that makes SM a bit special and different from other companies/developers), and this topic is in their list of potential improvement. If and when they will be able of improving this, has never been defined.

- as I try to explain in the previous posts, like other SampleModeling products, the Strings are not designed to playback sustain just pressing a key or triggering a MIDI note via sequencer/notation. This can produce pretty static, flat sound that can remember (even if in my personal opinion a lot more organic) the synth pad (being the synth pad often made with low-fi samples looped stretched and filtered, it obviously sound silky and smooth).

- If the SampleModeling Strings are played the way they are designed (moving cc11 and cc1 as a minimum requirement, and for fine tuning some more sound definition tools/controllers) the "synth" effect is rapidly disappearing and the timbral difference vs. libraries and real is dramatically reduced or often totally removed (still keeping the superior expression and flexibility).


----------



## Eptesicus

Doing some experimenting and soaring strings is a really good library to layer this with for some much needed emotional vibrato. Soaring Strings sounds bit weedy/thin on its own but layering it with these adds some lovely molto vibrato, and then you get the bite and clarity of sample modeling strings. The advantage of soaring is that it is already pretty dry out of the box and also has rebowing as well.

Here is the Jurassic park theme layered, then SM on its own and soaring on its own. This is just crudely played in with an expression pedal/mod wheel with no further editing.

Both on their own are too extremes. With one you cant inject enough emotion/vibrato into it, and the other has too much, all the time as a bit much.

Together makes a much nicer rich hollywood sound.


----------



## x-dfo

Eptesicus said:


> Doing some experimenting and soaring strings is a really good library to layer this with for some much needed emotional vibrato. Soaring Strings sounds bit weedy/thin on its own but layering it with these adds some lovely molto vibrato, and then you get the bite and clarity of sample modeling strings. The advantage of soaring is that it is already pretty dry out of the box and also has rebowing as well.
> 
> Here is the Jurassic park theme layered, then SM on its own and soaring on its own. This is just crudely played in with an expression pedal/mod wheel with no further editing.
> 
> Both on their own are too extremes. With one you cant inject enough emotion/vibrato into it, and the other has too much, all the time as a bit much.
> 
> Together makes a much nicer rich hollywood sound.


Soaring sounds like there are definitely more varieties in bodies and that makes a huge difference for the perceived size.


----------



## Eptesicus

x-dfo said:


> Soaring sounds like there are definitely more varieties in bodies and that makes a huge difference for the perceived size.



Indeed. I really like them together. SM layered in gets rid of the slightly "bee" sounding quality of soaring strings and lets you tame the sometimes excessive always on vibrato, and soaring strings adds some much needed body to the rather sterile SM sound.


----------



## Fa

Eptesicus said:


> Indeed. I really like them together. SM layered in gets rid of the slightly "bee" sounding quality of soaring strings and lets you tame the sometimes excessive always on vibrato, and soaring strings adds some much needed body to the rather sterile SM sound.


If you like to know more about SM potential, I would love to get your MIDI and send it back to you with some SM controllers program, maybe going closer to your expressive will. Let me know


----------



## Eptesicus

Fa said:


> If you like to know more about SM potential, I would love to get your MIDI and send it back to you with some SM controllers program, maybe going closer to your expressive will. Let me know



I have done plenty of experimenting. The molto vibrato expressive like sound you can get from other libraries like soaring strings isn't there (in the ensembles)

You are welcome to post some of your own pieces displaying it though. Happy to be proven wrong!


----------



## Fa

Eptesicus said:


> I have done plenty of experimenting. The molto vibrato expressive like sound you can get from other libraries like soaring strings isn't there (in the ensembles)
> 
> You are welcome to post some of your own pieces displaying it though. Happy to be proven wrong!



...there are already plenty of examples on line, but I think that the best was just doing your very same segment. If I make it AUDIO anyway you may think I'm cheating and you don't learn anything new. If I was sending back your own MIDI with my suggestions you had absolute evidence transparence.

But it seems you take it personal... then sorry no. It's not personal, and it's not a challenge: you stated the sound is sterile and you already did everything possible. If your purpose is discover and improve, we may cooperate. If your scope was just blaming and complaining, then it's very short: I respect you, but I don't agree. End of the story, peace and love.


----------



## Eptesicus

Fa said:


> ...there are already plenty of examples on line, but I think that the best was just doing your very same segment. If I make it AUDIO anyway you may think I'm cheating and you don't learn anything new. If I was sending back your own MIDI with my suggestions you had absolute evidence transparence.
> 
> But it seems you take it personal... then sorry no. It's not personal, and it's not a challenge: you stated the sound is sterile and you already did everything possible. If your purpose is discover and improve, we may cooperate. If your scope was just blaming and complaining, then it's very short: I respect you, but I don't agree. End of the story, peace and love.



I haven't taken anything personally 

I've listened to every demo there is of these strings and I haven't heard what I'm after in any of those either.

I'm only suggesting that this be worked on in future updates that is all. I'm not the only owner saying the same things either.

Why does the guy who has done the gladiator and lotr mock ups still layer in other libraries if SM strings does everything that is required?....and these are demos posted on their own site!

Maybe I'm not explaining it well, but there is a certain "sound". A rich full bodied expression that you get from a decent sized string ensemble playing extreme vibrato which I'm finding difficult to capture. I get that there are plenty of vibrato options, but these alongside the medium and large ensembles aren't quite doing it for me. It isn't fooling my ears into thinking it's a real large ensemble basically.

I'm just being honest and voicing some criticism, that is all. There are many positives to SM strings, but like all libraries it has shortcomings. One easy way to see if SM truly is capable of doing what is say is for you to try and play that Jurassic park melody i posted earlier and get it sounding exactly like soaring strings (or as close as possible - Im not saying soaring strings is perfect either by the way, just that it does that one thing quite well).

Are you affiliated with or do you work for sample modelling?


----------



## Fa

I didn't say layering is wrong or not requested. I think the opposite, layering SM with libraries provide an infinite and amazing set of sound colours and expression.

I just find the example you posted doesn't represent the "vibrato potential" of the SM Strings, and offered you an objective way to verify if I'm right or wrong. You don't want, fine.

Mastering the full vibrato potential of SM Strings can help to create more expressive layering as well.


----------



## Eptesicus

Fa said:


> I didn't say layering is wrong or not requested. I think the opposite, layering SM with libraries provide an infinite and amazing set of sound colours and expression.
> 
> I just find the example you posted doesn't represent the "vibrato potential" of the SM Strings, and offered you an objective way to verify if I'm right or wrong. You don't want, fine.
> 
> Mastering the full vibrato potential of SM Strings can help to create more expressive layering as well.



You are welcome to. I'm not going to think you are lying if you post an audio clip!

The Jurassic park phrase is very easy. As i said earlier, see if you can match the soaring example more closely and then you are welcome to send me the midi if you like and i can see what i am doing wrong.

I feel like you think I am being confrontational, but assure you I'm not. I'm happy to learn, I've just shut down all my daw stuff now for the day and I'm not going to fire it up and extract the midi etc.


----------



## I like music

Eptesicus said:


> I haven't taken anything personally
> 
> I've listened to every demo there is of these strings and I haven't heard what I'm after in any of those either.
> 
> I'm only suggesting that this be worked on in future updates that is all. I'm not the only owner saying the same things either.
> 
> Why does the guy who has done the gladiator and lotr mock ups still layer in other libraries if SM strings does everything that is required?....and these are demos posted on their own site!
> 
> Maybe I'm not explaining it well, but there is a certain "sound". A rich full bodied expression that you get from a decent sized string ensemble playing extreme vibrato which I'm finding difficult to capture. I get that there are plenty of vibrato options, but these alongside the medium and large ensembles aren't quite doing it for me. It isn't fooling my ears into thinking it's a real large ensemble basically.
> 
> I'm just being honest and voicing some criticism, that is all. There are many positives to SM strings, but like all libraries it has shortcomings. One easy way to see if SM truly is capable of doing what is say is for you to try and play that Jurassic park melody i posted earlier and get it sounding exactly like soaring strings (or as close as possible - Im not saying soaring strings is perfect either by the way, just that it does that one thing quite well).
> 
> Are you affiliated with or do you work for sample modelling?





Eptesicus said:


> You are welcome to. I'm not going to think you are lying if you post an audio clip!
> 
> The Jurassic park phrase is very easy. As i said earlier, see if you can match the soaring example more closely and then you are welcome to send me the midi if you like and i can see what i am doing wrong.
> 
> I feel like you think I am being confrontational, but assure you I'm not. I'm happy to learn, I've just shut down all my daw stuff now for the day and I'm not going to fire it up and extract the midi etc.



I want to try that phrase now. I go between totally disagreeing with what you wrote and agreeing with it. Overall I love these strings. 

Currently I'm layering the small ensembles with CSS. BTW have you tried layering the large or medium ensembles with the small ensembles? Something I need to remind myself to try. The solo strings as first chairs I liked quite a bit.


----------



## Eptesicus

I like music said:


> I go between totally disagreeing with what you wrote and agreeing with it.



Haha. I like this comment 

I'm not going to just come on here and post about how wonderful a library is, as that is rarely helpful to anyone and doesn't do us or the industry any favours. We must be demanding and always want more. It is our hard earn cash we are parting with after all.

There is a lot to like with SM strings and it can do some things no conventional libraries can do. I love the solos, and the double stop/poly legato works very well indeed. A particular highlight is the soft dynamics in my opinion. There is something wonderfully delicate/intimate there. This is my first "modelled" library and no other library i have used makes you feel like you are molding the performance as much as this. It feels like you are creating something more unique.

My mine gripes are -

- Poor tremolo. It really doesn't sound realistic at all. Needs a rework.
- The sordino effect is *not* good
- Large (and to a lesser extent medium) ensembles don't sound quite right to my ears. It does sort of create the effect of a large ensemble but with it comes something my ears aren't quite liking.
- Ensemble vibrato could be more over the top/expressive in my opinion

I am looking forward to future updates as i do think this has a lot more potential.


----------



## I like music

Eptesicus said:


> Haha. I like this comment
> 
> I'm not going to just come on here and post about how wonderful a library is, as that is rarely helpful to anyone and doesn't do us or the industry any favours. We must be demanding and always want more. It is our hard earn cash we are parting with after all.
> 
> There is a lot to like with SM strings and it can do some things no conventional libraries can do. I love the solos, and the double stop/poly legato works very well indeed. A particular highlight is the soft dynamics in my opinion. There is something wonderfully delicate/intimate there. This is my first "modelled" library and no other library i have used makes you feel like you are molding the performance as much as this. It feels like you are creating something more unique.
> 
> My mine gripes are -
> 
> - Poor tremolo. It really doesn't sound realistic at all. Needs a rework.
> - The sordino effect is *not* good
> - Large (and to a lesser extent medium) ensembles don't sound quite right to my ears. It does sort of create the effect of a large ensemble but with it comes something my ears aren't quite liking.
> - Ensemble vibrato could be more over the top/expressive in my opinion
> 
> I am looking forward to future updates as i do think this has a lot more potential.


Interesting, since it is the softest dynamics that I'm not on board with!

But I think one can really fuck these strings up with the wrong combo of ccs which is what I think I've done on the softest dynamics.

That and the Cello/Basses have this odd sounding artefact at the highest dynamics. Have you noticed this or am I just confusing actual Cello tone for a weird sound?


----------



## Fa

Eptesicus said:


> You are welcome to. I'm not going to think you are lying if you post an audio clip!
> 
> The Jurassic park phrase is very easy. As i said earlier, see if you can match the soaring example more closely and then you are welcome to send me the midi if you like and i can see what i am doing wrong.
> 
> I feel like you think I am being confrontational, but assure you I'm not. I'm happy to learn, I've just shut down all my daw stuff now for the day and I'm not going to fire it up and extract the midi etc.



Ok, a quick little example of what I mean:

- simple vibrato: what I get from SM strings out of the box, with almost no editing, just some parameters set.

- first chair: the very same just modulated by a first chair 

- mix: one of the possible resulting mixes


----------



## Eptesicus

Fa said:


> Ok, a quick little example of what I mean:
> 
> - simple vibrato: what I get from SM strings out of the box, with almost no editing, just some parameters set.
> 
> - first chair: the very same just modulated by a first chair
> 
> - mix: one of the possible resulting mixes




Thanks.

As expected though, it doesn't sound much different to my initial SM only example that I posted earlier (except slightly better played in ).

It doesn't get anywhere near the effect soaring strings conveys though.

Here is my SM example again.


----------



## Fa

Eptesicus said:


> Thanks.
> 
> As expected though, it doesn't sound much different to my initial SM only example that I posted earlier (except slightly better played in ).
> 
> It doesn't get anywhere near the effect soaring strings conveys though.
> 
> Here is my SM example again.



I don't understand what is "much different" in your sentence. In my very humble opinion they have nothing in common but the tune. 

Then probably we may stop here. All the best.


----------



## Eptesicus

Fa said:


> I don't understand what is "much different" in your sentence. In my very humble opinion they have nothing in common but the tune.
> 
> Then probably we may stop here. All the best.



Well yours seems to be at a much lower dynamic than mine so sounds more delicate. I'm still not hearing a really pronounced vibrato a la soaring strings.

I have done another take, this time with even more expressive vibrato (attached).

Don't get me wrong, i'm not saying it is "bad". It is actually quite nice, but i feel like they need a little extra body or "oomph" in cases like this which is what my initial post about layering it with soaring strings was all about.

It just cant quite get the sound i'm looking for. Clearly i am not alone in that, as some of the demo videos on sample modelings own site have it layered with other string libraries! Why would that be, if it could be shaped to get the exact sound everyone wants?


----------



## Fa

Eptesicus said:


> Well yours seems to be at a much lower dynamic than mine so sounds more delicate. I'm still not hearing a really pronounced vibrato a la soaring strings.
> 
> I have done another take, this time with even more expressive vibrato (attached).
> 
> Don't get me wrong, i'm not saying it is "bad". It is actually quite nice, but i feel like they need a little extra body or "oomph" in cases like this which is what my initial post about layering it with soaring strings was all about.
> 
> It just cant quite get the sound i'm looking for. Clearly i am not alone in that, as some of the demo videos on sample modelings own site have it layered with other string libraries! Why would that be, if it could be shaped to get the exact sound everyone wants?



My point was: your previous example had no vibrato at all, and was described as a fault of SM, that is not because it was your decision/programming. 

SM has not the soaring string vibrato, because to force it in a "large ensemble" is pretty hard (but it has this and even stronger and better vibrato in small ensemble), but IMHO still has a better overall sound than soaring strings, as you also noticed.

My recommendation was to use SM vibrato, to get vibrato, as for layering with soaring vibrato, or the mismatch was great and unnecessary.

Your last example is fair: I'm sure it blends better with soaring strings as well.


----------



## Eptesicus

Fa said:


> My point was: your previous example had no vibrato at all, and was described as a fault of SM, that is not because it was your decision/programming.
> 
> SM has not the soaring string vibrato, because to force it in a "large ensemble" is pretty hard (but it has this and even stronger and better vibrato in small ensemble), but IMHO still has a better overall sound than soaring strings, as you also noticed.
> 
> My recommendation was to use SM vibrato, to get vibrato, as for layering with soaring vibrato, or the mismatch was great and unnecessary.
> 
> Your last example is fair: I'm sure it blends better with soaring strings as well.



It did have a lot of vibrato, especially when it ups the octave. That was more of artistic choice than anything else in the original demo.

As you say though, soaring strings is not ideal. It is too much vibrato all the time (to the point of sounding bee like in places). SM can't quite get all the way there just yet though (for me/my tastes anyway) Careful blending does offer a nice body of sound and vibrato though.


----------



## philippe goi

Quelle meilleure façon de tester ces cordes fabuleuses que "Psycho" de Bernard Hermann!
View attachment SampleModeling Strings Psycho Prélude Bernard Hermann.mp4


----------



## x-dfo

philippe goi said:


> Quelle meilleure façon de tester ces cordes fabuleuses que "Psycho" de Bernard Hermann!
> View attachment SampleModeling Strings Psycho Prélude Bernard Hermann.mp4


That was great!
Did you use the built in reverb/ambience or a plugin?


----------



## philippe goi

Thank you very much!

I use Parallax audio virtual sound stage for the first reflexions , micro DECCA , Todd studio reverbe ir


----------



## muziksculp

@philippe goi ,

Wonderful sounding emulation of BH's Psycho. Sample Modeling strings sound very realistic in this demo. 

Thanks for sharing.


----------



## Fa

philippe goi said:


> Quelle meilleure façon de tester ces cordes fabuleuses que "Psycho" de Bernard Hermann!



...mais oui bien sûr!


----------



## DANIELE

Here a not definitive version of my last track using SM Strings only (for the strings):









Obi Wan Mastering 001 - Clyp


Listen to Obi Wan Mastering 001 | Clyp is the easiest way to record, upload and share audio.




clyp.it





Is someone able to replicate this "effect" from this score? I tried to but I'm not able to get the same buzzing effect (although I haven't used the synth mentioned here, what synth is anyway? A quiet sawtooth oscillator?). I also haven't tried to do it with the same pitches but I adapted it to the scale I was using.
Maybe the trick is in the synth sound but I'm not sure about it. I think I could be able to do it with SM Strings but there is something I don't know I have to know.



Thank you.


----------



## Fa

Very good level already, Daniele, nice and impressive job. Reading the score, I think that the use of the Synth doubling some of the strings and brass parts is intended, as you supposed, to add harmonics and vibration (it's described "like an Organ" and supports the chorus.


----------



## muziksculp

@DANIELE

I listened to your audio demo, it sounds wonderful. SM Strings sound very natural, and realistic, also love the Brass you used, what Brass samples are you using in this track ? 

Thanks for sharing.


----------



## I like music

muziksculp said:


> @DANIELE
> 
> I listened to your audio demo, it sounds wonderful. SM Strings sound very natural, and realistic, also love the Brass you used, what Brass samples are you using in this track ?
> 
> Thanks for sharing.


Infinite Brass I believe


----------



## DANIELE

Fa said:


> Very good level already, Daniele, nice and impressive job. Reading the score, I think that the use of the Synth doubling some of the strings and brass parts is intended, as you supposed, to add harmonics and vibration (it's described "like an Organ" and supports the chorus.



Thank you Fa. I cannot hear an organ like synth in that specific passage. The final effect is a buzzing like sound and I'm just asking myself if it is achieved by strings for the most part or if it is the synth that adds that final sound. Are you able to replicate this with SM strings? I was able to get a good effect by replicating that dissonant intervals but not the same one. So my question is about the realism of that final result, I mean, could this be achievable in a real orchestra context. The differences I noticed is that in my attempt I could clearly hear every section while in the original score the final effect is more like a unique sound. Some measures earlier there is another similar strings passage but there you can hear the strings better.

I'm asking just for a research and study purposes.

Anyway I couldn't be able to do this track without SM strings, there are so many different passages that would drive me crazy with any other library. I'm trying to get the strangest things I find because it is a lot of fun to experiment with the library.



muziksculp said:


> @DANIELE
> 
> I listened to your audio demo, it sounds wonderful. SM Strings sound very natural, and realistic, also love the Brass you used, what Brass samples are you using in this track ?
> 
> Thanks for sharing.



_I like music_ guessed right. I'm using IB. 

Thank you for the compliments.


----------



## muziksculp

I like music said:


> Infinite Brass I believe



Thanks for the feedback.

Do you also have Sample Modeling Brass ? I'm curious how SM Brass compares to IB ?

I don't have IB or SM Brass, I have been tempted to purchase SM Brass Bundle, but I'm also liking the way IB sounds. I need to do some more research on these two library options, if you have any feedback on IB vs SM Brass I would be interested in reading it.


----------



## I like music

muziksculp said:


> Thanks for the feedback.
> 
> Do you also have Sample Modeling Brass ? I'm curious how SM Brass compares to IB ?
> 
> I don't have IB or SM Brass, I have been tempted to purchase SM Brass Bundle, but I'm also liking the way IB sounds. I need to do some more research on these two library options, if you have any feedback on IB vs SM Brass I would be interested in reading it.



Have had a chance to play with SM at a colleague's place but very little. Super impressive on solo stuff. Didn't test for ensemble stuff. 

I believe they would complement each other well. IB is utterly brilliant for me. For my uses, I'd go for it first. But definitely going to try for SM brass too. 

I know that doesn't help but I think ib easier out of the box (but also has more control than any other library except SM or am brass)


----------



## muziksculp

I like music said:


> Have had a chance to play with SM at a colleague's place but very little. Super impressive on solo stuff. Didn't test for ensemble stuff.
> 
> I believe they would complement each other well. IB is utterly brilliant for me. For my uses, I'd go for it first. But definitely going to try for SM brass too.
> 
> I know that doesn't help but I think ib easier out of the box (but also has more control than any other library except SM or am brass)



Thanks for the feedback.

I know very little about IB, and don't hear a lot about them, SM Brass Solo Instruments are more popular on forums, and more demos seem to be available, I think SM Brass offers a lot more control features than IB, SM Brass features Solo Instrument, IB is more towards Brass Ensemble, so they are very different in terms how they are used. I still need to do some more research on both options.

Since this thread is discussing SM Solo & Ens. Strings, maybe a new topic to discuss the brass libraries would not be a bad idea. i.e. new topic such as : SM Brass vs Infinte Brass


----------



## I like music

muziksculp said:


> Thanks for the feedback.
> 
> I know very little about IB, and don't hear a lot about them, SM Brass Solo Instruments are more popular on forums, and more demos seem to be available, I think SM Brass offers a lot more control features than IB, SM Brass features Solo Instrument, IB is more towards Brass Ensemble, so they are very different in terms how they are used. I still need to do some more research on both options.
> 
> Since this thread is discussing SM Solo & Ens. Strings, maybe a new topic to discuss the brass libraries would not be a bad idea. i.e. new topic such as : SM Brass vs Infinte Brass


Have you checked the infinite brass thread? Excellent resource with lots of demos. By the way, the solo instruments on Infinite Brass are absolutely excellent. Honestly, super flexible and good tone!


----------



## muziksculp

I like music said:


> Have you checked the infinite brass thread? Excellent resource with lots of demos. By the way, the solo instruments on Infinite Brass are absolutely excellent. Honestly, super flexible and good tone!



Thanks. I will check the IB thread. 

Edit : Oh the IB thread is 65 pages, That's too much info to sift through 

I have a feeling it won't be easy to decide which one to get, but the price of IB is kind of steep.


----------



## x-dfo

muziksculp said:


> Thanks. I will check the IB thread.
> 
> Edit : Oh the IB thread is 65 pages, That's too much info to sift through
> 
> I have a feeling it won't be easy to decide which one to get, but the price of IB is kind of steep.


If the SM brass ensembles are like the SM string ensembles then IB is a better value, also taking into account how playable it is. The SM string ensembles require far more cpu, don't have near the flexibility in reverb/placement - I can stack like 16 horns in IB and take up the same CPU as a single SM string ensemble.


----------



## Fa

muziksculp said:


> Thanks. I will check the IB thread.
> 
> Edit : Oh the IB thread is 65 pages, That's too much info to sift through
> 
> I have a feeling it won't be easy to decide which one to get, but the price of IB is kind of steep.



If you watch some of the videos of this channel, you will get what SampleModeling Brass can do in ensemble:
*Sample Control YouTube channel*

It has some of the best mockup ever, in my very humble opinion, and some tips&tricks on how to achieve the sound. 

(It's a pity the guy doing it, stopped producing/posting few years ago. I hope he is fine and will be back sooner or later).


----------



## muziksculp

Fa said:


> If you watch some of the videos of this channel, you will get what SampleModeling Brass can do in ensemble:
> *Sample Control YouTube channel*
> 
> It has some of the best mockup ever, in my very humble opinion, and some tips&tricks on how to achieve the sound.
> 
> (It's a pity the guy doing it, stopped producing/posting few years ago. I hope he is fine and will be back sooner or later).



Thanks Fa,

I will check the Youtube channel you recommended. I'm also going to check if there are any videos showing Infinite Brass in action. I don't want to divert the topic on this thread, which is more about the Sample Modeling Solo & Ens. Strings.


----------



## Dor F.

pmcrockett said:


> Version 1.1 is now out. Haven't tried it yet, but the changelog is impressive (copy/pasted from the email):
> 
> *What's new in Samplemodeling Solo & Ensemble Strings Update v1.1?*
> 
> *Bugfixes.*
> The instruments utilize a series of CCs, namely CC12, CC13, CC17 for internal use. These midi controllers were previously unshielded, and could yield unwanted side effects on dynamics and pitch if transmitted from external midi devices such, for example CC13 used by the TEC breath controller. This has been fixed in this update.
> *New Cello (Solo & Ensemble)*
> The Cello(s) have been completely redesigned, using a new set of samples and IRs, with the main aim of getting rid of some timbral defects, such an overall too nasal sound, and some unpleasantly resonating harmonics.
> Take a listen to these demos by Emmanuel Y. Lazzara:
> Game of Thrones Theme Song - Cello & Violin Cover
> Fires in the Night of Istanbul (Middle Eastern dark cello music)
> 
> *On-the-string vs. off- the-string attacks.*
> This is a new feature, which has been implemented in all the instruments of the series. One can now select on-the-string attack (based on new marcato samples) by setting CC38 above 64. This CC controls the intensity of this effect. The resulting attacks are more gritty and aggressive, as requested by several users. If CC38 is set below 68, the attack will progressively turn into a spiccato. A pristine off-the-string attack will be obtained by playing a short note (less of 120 ms duration) with velocity above 100. This was previously attainable only if the duration did not exceed 40 ms, which was impractical for live playing.
> *On-the-string vs. off- the-string releases.*
> This is also a new feature, implemented in all the instruments of the series. Previously, all note offs yielded an off-the-string release. We have added an on-the-string decay, which is produced when CC27 is below 64. The lower the value of CC27, the shorter the decay. A similar principle controls the length of the off-the-string release, which is roughly proportional to CC27 above 64.
> *Detaché and Bow Change.*
> We made a thorough analysis of real examples of these articulations. Although they may vary enormously, from nearly inaudible to very scratchy, depending on the context, there are some elements which clearly differentiate a detaché from a slurred legato. We improved the reproduction of these articulations, adding and modeling suitable samples, whose intensity is under control of CC38. This controller CC38, therefore, acts on both attacks and bowchanges, making them more or less aggressive. The duration of detaché/bowchange articulation is controlled by the interplay between note-on velocity and CC26. This overall approach yields maximal flexibility and, in our opinion, represents a definite improvement over the first release.
> *Ensemble Maker.*
> The timing of note on & off is randomized according to logical rules. In this update it has been optimized by increasing the time dispersion of the elements of the ensemble, but reducing it above a certain note-on velocity to preserve the definition of the attacks. The dispersion is also reduced in the presence of pizzicato and col legno.
> *Ensemble Size and Vibrato.*
> The perceived ensemble size is still controlled by CC95. However, a more precise definition of ensemble vibrato follows. The ensembles have a final vibrato effect which is quite different from single instruments. For CC95 ranging from zero to about 70-80, the final effect will be that of a senza vibrato ensemble. Above this threshold, a slight vibrato will appear. Vibrato in ensemble can by asynchronous (the normal case) or it may have some synchronous elements (something that is more often present in small ensembles), corresponding to a first chair players. Our ensembles are by default exploiting asynchronous vibrato. This means that if one raises CC1, this asynchronous component will be more and more evident. For this reason the synchronous component (CC99) is set to zero by default. If one wants to add a synchronous vibrato, he should increase CC99. In either case, differently from solo instruments, optimal CC19 values will range from zero to about 40. For small ensembles, CC19 may even be set to normal vibrato values, i.e. 60-90. Feel free to experiment.
> *Microtuning.*
> The previous release used static microtuning. Up to twelve presets could be recalled by simultaneously pressing B-1 and any KS between C0 and B0. The present update adds another new feature for maximum flexibility, namely, dynamic microtuning. If the preset "dynamic" is selected, by simultaneously pressing B-1, the sustain pedal and any note between C0 and B0, the pressed notes will be subject to microtuning. Any combination of detuned note is therefore allowed and switched in real time.
> *there are additional small fixes and improvements in this new release.*
> You may be unaware of them or you may notice that some notes in some instruments sound better. We did our best to improve the overall sound. It took a while, but we believe this time has yielded improvements you will enjoy.



Hi there,
Maybe you could answer me the crucial technical question before I purchase this magnificent SM strings.

can you mapping and change the CC values on SM strings silo&large ensemble , to the faders keyboard?
For example:
CC 26 to be CC 95 on my keyboard fader.
Or that the CC values in SM Strings are constant and can’t be changed?

the problematic situation with my keyboard CC faders, is that you can’t change them to the CC values of the program, it need to be the opposite.
Hope to get answer by you,
Many thanks,
Dor


----------



## Shion Yomi

Dor F. said:


> Hi there,
> Maybe you could answer me the crucial technical question before I purchase this magnificent SM strings.
> 
> can you mapping and change the CC values on SM strings silo&large ensemble , to the faders keyboard?
> For example:
> CC 26 to be CC 95 on my keyboard fader.
> Or that the CC values in SM Strings are constant and can’t be changed?
> 
> the problematic situation with my keyboard CC faders, is that you can’t change them to the CC values of the program, it need to be the opposite.
> Hope to get answer by you,
> Many thanks,
> Dor



hey you can change which CC controls what, so instead of having CC 95 control ensemble size, you can remap it to CC 26 instead. This works for pretty much every CC in SM Strings


----------



## DANIELE

You could also think of doing some CC remapping with a midi mapper or with a simple script in Kontakt itself, if you don't want to change the midi CCs internally. This is useful especially if you have to update the library, you can always keep the default settings in the library.


----------



## muziksculp

A new video showing the SM Ensemble Strings in more detail


----------



## philippe goi

Excerpt Pavane by Gabriel Fauré with solo strings .
Only with 3 cc11 cc1 cc19 controllers. 
View attachment Samplemodeling Strings Pavane Gabriel FAURE.mp4


----------



## Woodie1972

I think it's nicely played, but I'm not so enthousiastic about the pizzicato of the opening, which sounds pretty harsh to me. I don't know the library, but it sounds as if the velocity is pretty close to the maximum. And when the 1st & 2nd violins play together, they sound a bit synthetic IMO.
It's not meant to offend you, just my humble opinion.


----------



## RogiervG

Woodie1972 said:


> I think it's nicely played, but I'm not so enthousiastic about the pizzicato of the opening, which sounds pretty harsh to me. I don't know the library, but it sounds as if the velocity is pretty close to the maximum. And when the 1st & 2nd violins play together, they sound a bit synthetic IMO.
> It's not meant to offend you, just my humble opinion.


I concur.. and also not in an offended way towards philippe.


----------



## philippe goi

thank you for your feedback , concerning this work I did not use the breath control for real time , I took the midi file of the quartet and I drew the curves step by step . The work is longer in this way and may be less natural .
Using a breath control gives me more sense in expressiveness. I love to test a lot of things with this bank, the fact of being able to modulate the stamp in permanance is quite fascinating!


----------



## robgb

Eptesicus said:


> Thanks.
> 
> As expected though, it doesn't sound much different to my initial SM only example that I posted earlier (except slightly better played in ).
> 
> It doesn't get anywhere near the effect soaring strings conveys though.
> 
> Here is my SM example again.


If you don't think the two examples sound different, then I'm not sure what to tell you. There is a pretty vast difference between them.


----------



## Woodie1972

philippe goi said:


> thank you for your feedback , concerning this work I did not use the breath control for real time , I took the midi file of the quartet and I drew the curves step by step . The work is longer in this way and may be less natural .
> Using a breath control gives me more sense in expressiveness. I love to test a lot of things with this bank, the fact of being able to modulate the stamp in permanance is quite fascinating!



I see your point. Drawing in lines is of course not the same as playing it live, but my piano skills are not that great, so I have to draw all stuff in the editor lines.
Personally I think breath controllers work great with brass and woodwinds, but if people use them with strings, it gives a different phrasing in terms of what real world string players would do.
There are those videos of a (Spanish?) musician explaining in detail how to work with the Sample modeling libraries, both brass and strings. And although I think he does amazing stuff with the instruments, one can hear that he uses a breath controller for string instruments. The phrasing is nice and musical, but you can hear it is a wind player phrasing string lines.
It's difficult to explain, but if you listen to it, you will know what I mean.
But I do like his videos as he makes great music with the libraries. I wouldn't mind to be able to play and use that breath controller like he does.


----------



## purple

muziksculp said:


> A new video showing the SM Ensemble Strings in more detail



We should make a gofundme to buy Gomez a sturdier stand for his keyboards... The wobbling makes me nervous every time I watch his videos....


----------



## Eptesicus

robgb said:


> If you don't think the two examples sound different, then I'm not sure what to tell you. There is a pretty vast difference between them.



They sound different, but not markedly so. He just turned up the expressive vibrato more at the start.

It isn't different to the point of sounding like the vibrato from soaring strings or an intense lush molto vibrato which was my original point. This, as someone else pointed out, is likely because that sound comes from having a real section sampled and they havent quite nailed the emulation of that within the section patches yet.


----------



## I like music

Eptesicus said:


> They sound different, but not markedly so. He just turned up the expressive vibrato more at the start.
> 
> It isn't different to the point of sounding like the vibrato from soaring strings or an intense lush molto vibrato which was my original point. This, as someone else pointed out, is likely because that sound comes from having a real section sampled and they havent quite nailed the emulation of that within the section patches yet.



Are you using SM strings by layering them now? I've found that layering them with just the close mics of CSS has been quite good.


----------



## robgb

Eptesicus said:


> They sound different, but not markedly so. He just turned up the expressive vibrato more at the start.


They sound markedly different.


----------



## Eptesicus

robgb said:


> They sound markedly different.



No disrespect, but as you got the library for free, i have very little interest in what you have to say about this library, objectively speaking.

It quite obviously doesn't sound _that _different. Not to the point of emulating the soaring string sound which was my whole initial point.


----------



## Eptesicus

I like music said:


> Are you using SM strings by layering them now? I've found that layering them with just the close mics of CSS has been quite good.



Yes, to get certain sounds that i'm looking for i layer them, either with soaring or CSS. They can blend very well which is a huge plus.


----------



## I like music

Eptesicus said:


> Yes, to get certain sounds that i'm looking for i layer them, either with soaring or CSS. They can blend very well which is a huge plus.



Cool. I had struggled with layering since CSS was naturally providing a lot of ambience, and combining the two seemed to give a bit TOO much ambience (also I couldn't match the ambiences). I switched to CSS close mics, and I felt the two blended quite nicely doing this.


----------



## robgb

Eptesicus said:


> No disrespect, but as you got the library for free, i have very little interest in what you have to say about this library, objectively speaking.


Sure. Impugn my integrity. No disrespect at all. I've never been anything but transparent about how I came to get this library. But what I'm saying RIGHT NOW has absolutely nothing to do with the library in question, and everything to do with the difference between the two audio samples posted. They sound markedly different. And I'm not sure how my getting a review copy of the library changes that.


----------



## Woodie1972

I agree, paying for a library, or getting it for free, shouldn't make any difference.
I bought libraries in the past, most of the time paying serious money for it, and several are never used as the workflow or design of the library doesn't suit me. Demos by developers can be very misleading, that's what I learned the hard way. Nowadays I only listen to what users say about libraries, not the 'raving' reviews or demos from developers.

But apart from that: if someone pays for it, or gets it for free, doesn't make his or her opinion more or less valuable.
I wouldn't mind getting the Sample Modeling strings for free😎


----------



## Eptesicus

Woodie1972 said:


> I agree, paying for a library, or getting it for free, shouldn't make any difference.
> I bought libraries in the past, most of the time paying serious money for it, and several are never used as the workflow or design of the library doesn't suit me. Demos by developers can be very misleading, that's what I learned the hard way. Nowadays I only listen to what users say about libraries, not the 'raving' reviews or demos from developers.
> 
> But apart from that: if someone pays for it, or gets it for free, doesn't make his or her opinion more or less valuable.
> I wouldn't mind getting the Sample Modeling strings for free😎



Rather depends on one's motivation.

I would always value a paying customer's opinion over someone who got it for free.

It's often blindingly obvious when someone isn't being objective.


----------



## David Cuny

Eptesicus said:


> Rather depends on one's motivation.
> 
> I would always value a paying customer's opinion over someone who got it for free.
> 
> It's often blindingly obvious when someone isn't being objective.


So you decided it was a good idea to double down on this personal attack on *robg*?


----------



## Eptesicus

David Cuny said:


> So you decided it was a good idea to double down on this personal attack on *robg*?



How was it a personal attack?

I'm just being honest and saying why i cant take what he says about this library objectively. I didnt ask him to get involved in this specific discussion re the vibrato, that was seemingly over weeks ago. He is the one that brought it up again (which is fair enough, it is an open forum). However, i am equally allowed to tell him why i dont want to engage with him about this particular library.

Its just my opinion/feelings on the matter.

I'm just untrusting and like to err on the side of caution.

If i see a short, overly gushing review from someone who got the library free, when there are quite obviously many more shortcomings than have been mentioned, then i will be sceptical.


----------



## robgb

Eptesicus said:


> Rather depends on one's motivation.
> 
> I would always value a paying customer's opinion over someone who got it for free.
> 
> It's often blindingly obvious when someone isn't being objective.


I honestly don't care what you think of my reviews or my integrity. You certainly have a right to believe whatever you like. But again, what I said about those two audio files has absolutely nothing to do with the library or my review of it. You stated they sound virtually the same, except for some vibrato. If you think that's true, then I'm not the one with the objectivity problem.


----------



## robgb

By the way, just as an aside, MOST reviewers get the libraries, the books, the movies, the music, the merchandise they review for free. They either get it through the media outlet they work for or they get it directly from the manufacturer. Some of them don't disclose this fact. Those are the ones you should be wary of.


----------



## MartinH.

robgb said:


> By the way, just as an aside, MOST reviewers get the libraries, the books, the movies, the music, the merchandise they review for free. They either get it through the media outlet they work for or they get it directly from the manufacturer. Some of them don't disclose this fact. Those are the ones you should be wary of.



What bothers me is when a "review" has an affiliate link under the video and doesn't disclose that they are making money from sales generated through that link. Afaik that's straight up illegal in some countries.


----------



## robgb

MartinH. said:


> What bothers me is when a "review" has an affiliate link under the video and doesn't disclose that they are making money from sales generated through that link. Afaik that's straight up illegal in some countries.


In the U.S., reviewers are required to be fully transparent. If they get merchandise for free or have a financial interest in the company, they must disclose this or be fined a considerable amount of money.


----------



## David Cuny

Eptesicus said:


> How was it a personal attack?


I'm not saying that was your intent.

Indeed, the crux of the problem here is ascribing _intent _to_ actions._

If you left this as a personal disagreement, there's no attack there. Disagreements are fine, and encouraged.

But you specifically stated that you didn't believe he was being objective _because he had gotten it for free_.

By ascribing _motivation _to his actions, you turned this from a difference of opinion into a personal attack against his integrity.


----------



## Eptesicus

David Cuny said:


> I'm not saying that was your intent.
> 
> Indeed, the crux of the problem here is ascribing _intent _to_ actions._
> 
> If you left this as a personal disagreement, there's no attack there. Disagreements are fine, and encouraged.
> 
> But you specifically stated that you didn't believe he was being objective _because he had gotten it for free_.
> 
> By ascribing _motivation _to his actions, you turned this from a difference of opinion into a personal attack against his integrity.



Not really. My thought process isn't a specific attack on him and i never said he is not being objective out of malice. I've explained how i feel generally about reviewers who get libraries for free. I don't believe they can be fully objective (this applies across the board, not just in the vst world necessarily).

I dont believe i am alone in this thinking either, as it has been articulated elsewhere in this thread (post 16 as an example)

_"Many have been given a free copy. I don't care what they say, that 100% changes your view. "_






Let's talk about sample library reviews, demos, walkthroughs, and everything in between,


I hate to be mean, but someone has to say it. Most sample library review videos on youtube are useless. There are exceptions, and I don't want to name names, but I can't be the only one who thinks this, surely? If you're going to make a sample library video on youtube, make it a demo or a series...




vi-control.net





I am just extremely wary of this sort of thing.


----------



## chapbot

Please do not allow the psychopathic nitwits on this forum to get under your skin.

On another note, I do not care for Samplemodeling strings by themselves at all. However I have found they blend wonderfully with my other sampled libraries.


----------



## chocobitz825

Eptesicus said:


> _"Many have been given a free copy. I don't care what they say, that 100% changes your view. "_



It's kind of a pointless distinction between those who receive free copies and those who don't. I don't think any review could ever really be unbias. If you pay for something, there is a bias based on what you personally expected to get for your investment compared to what you feel you got. The only value of reviews is in careful precise critique of the functionality. After that, we're all going to have different opinions on the value of the library itself. No matter how much they try to upsell the library, we still have the burden of determining if all that sales talk really matters for our needs.


----------



## decredis

Seems like bow noise CC isn't working in Solo Viola? Seems very noticeably working in all the other solo instruments, and also in the Viola ensemble, but I can't hear any bow noise at any level of the CC in the Solo Viola. Does anyone else notice this?

EDIT: Actually for some notes I can hear bow noise, others I can't. Weird, I don't know, I'm going to have to look at this systematically and figure out what I think I'm hearing/not hearing and when. I may just be confusing myself somehow.


----------



## decredis

decredis said:


> Seems like bow noise CC isn't working in Solo Viola? Seems very noticeably working in all the other solo instruments, and also in the Viola ensemble, but I can't hear any bow noise at any level of the CC in the Solo Viola. Does anyone else notice this?
> 
> EDIT: Actually for some notes I can hear bow noise, others I can't. Weird, I don't know, I'm going to have to look at this systematically and figure out what I think I'm hearing/not hearing and when. I may just be confusing myself somehow.


Ok, no this definitely seems to be a thing.

I attach the same sequence of notes (E3, F3, G3, F3, E3, D3, C#3, D3), all velocities set at 2, all dynamics set to 0, all bow noise set to 127; in Viola Solo, in Viola Ensemble, and in Violin Solo.

You can clearly hear in Viola Solo that only the E3 has bow noise audible. For Viola Ensemble, and Violin Solo, the bow noise is audible in all notes.

(Haven't checked if this makes a difference, but for what it's worth, I had the Viola Solo on 2s instr, the Violin on 5s, and the Viola Ensemble on 4s.) [EDIT: Doesn't make a difference. Every instr for Viola Solo, only E3 has breath noise, as far as I can hear.]

Can anyone replicate this?


----------



## I like music

decredis said:


> Ok, no this definitely seems to be a thing.
> 
> I attach the same sequence of notes (E3, F3, G3, F3, E3, D3, C#3, D3), all velocities set at 2, all dynamics set to 0, all bow noise set to 127; in Viola Solo, in Viola Ensemble, and in Violin Solo.
> 
> You can clearly hear in Viola Solo that only the E3 has bow noise audible. For Viola Ensemble, and Violin Solo, the bow noise is audible in all notes.
> 
> (Haven't checked if this makes a difference, but for what it's worth, I had the Viola Solo on 2s instr, the Violin on 5s, and the Viola Ensemble on 4s.) [EDIT: Doesn't make a difference. Every instr for Viola Solo, only E3 has breath noise, as far as I can hear.]
> 
> Can anyone replicate this?



Will try in a few hours and let u know


----------



## I like music

decredis said:


> Ok, no this definitely seems to be a thing.
> 
> I attach the same sequence of notes (E3, F3, G3, F3, E3, D3, C#3, D3), all velocities set at 2, all dynamics set to 0, all bow noise set to 127; in Viola Solo, in Viola Ensemble, and in Violin Solo.
> 
> You can clearly hear in Viola Solo that only the E3 has bow noise audible. For Viola Ensemble, and Violin Solo, the bow noise is audible in all notes.
> 
> (Haven't checked if this makes a difference, but for what it's worth, I had the Viola Solo on 2s instr, the Violin on 5s, and the Viola Ensemble on 4s.) [EDIT: Doesn't make a difference. Every instr for Viola Solo, only E3 has breath noise, as far as I can hear.]
> 
> Can anyone replicate this?


OK yep, bow noise only present on that specific note on the Viola. Otherwise I cannot hear it on any other note.

So yes, can replicate the exact same issue it seems.


----------



## decredis

I like music said:


> OK yep, bow noise only present on that specific note on the Viola. Otherwise I cannot hear it on any other note.
> 
> So yes, can replicate the exact same issue it seems.


Thanks for confirming! I would guess it's a bug of omission, and relatively easy to correct in an update hopefully. It leapt out at me because I'm trying to mock up a quartet that opens with an exposed viola pp and I wanted it to start out really soft and quavery and shaky.


----------



## I like music

decredis said:


> Thanks for confirming! I would guess it's a bug of omission, and relatively easy to correct in an update hopefully. It leapt out at me because I'm trying to mock up a quartet that opens with an exposed viola pp and I wanted it to start out really soft and quavery and shaky.


 Serves you right for starting a piece with a solo viola.


----------



## decredis

I like music said:


> Serves you right for starting a piece with a solo viola.


Haha, yeah I only realised I had to after I decided to do the piece... it's actually Shostakovich's Fugue for piano in E minor, but I thought it would be nice to try to render it as a string quartet, and it turns out the first voice is in the viola's range, so what can you do? 

EDIT: Half-decent workaround, for now: layering onto Viola Solo the Viola Ensemble, but with a velocity and expression mapping to keep those at low and zero respectively, ensemble size set to small, width to low, and soundstage positioning in line with the Solo Viola. Then controlling the bow noise on the ensemble provides bow noise to the solo viola without adding noticeably much of an ensemble sound to it.


----------



## I like music

decredis said:


> Haha, yeah I only realised I had to after I decided to do the piece... it's actually Shostakovich's Fugue for piano in E minor, but I thought it would be nice to try to render it as a string quartet, and it turns out the first voice is in the viola's range, so what can you do?
> 
> EDIT: Half-decent workaround, for now: layering onto Viola Solo the Viola Ensemble, but with a velocity and expression mapping to keep those at low and zero respectively, ensemble size set to small, width to low, and soundstage positioning in line with the Solo Viola. Then controlling the bow noise on the ensemble provides bow noise to the solo viola without adding noticeably much of an ensemble sound to it.


Ah very clever! Well, I'd love to hear what you mock up...


----------



## decredis

I like music said:


> Ah very clever! Well, I'd love to hear what you mock up...


Well here's a first attempt at the first fifty bars. I ended up taking some liberties with the marked dynamics and tempo, playing it somewhat louder and faster than it's meant to be in the original piano score. Anyway, this is only my second ever attempt at mocking up an existing piece of music (after a bit of Ravel, again with SM strings), so apologies for the many flaws, here's some of Shostakovitch's Fugue in E Minor for piano, arranged for string quartet: (any thoughts, criticisms, pointers, very welcome)


----------



## Cristian Labelli

Hello everyone!
Here is my last MIDI mockup, performed with Samplemodeling Solo & Ensemble Strings v1.1 and TEC Breath Controller BBC2.

Any feedback welcome


----------



## muziksculp

Cristian Labelli said:


> Hello everyone!
> Here is my last MIDI mockup, performed with Samplemodeling Solo & Ensemble Strings v1.1 and TEC Breath Controller BBC2.
> 
> Any feedback welcome




Wonderful performance, and beautiful sound. Thanks for sharing. 

Q. Are you using a Leap Motion Controller for the hand Vibrato gestures ? 

Thanks.


----------



## Cristian Labelli

muziksculp said:


> Wonderful performance, and beautiful sound. Thanks for sharing.
> 
> Q. Are you using a Leap Motion Controller for the hand Vibrato gestures ?
> 
> Thanks.


Thank you for your kind words, I appreciate it!
I only used the BBC2 breath controller, assigning the horizontal tilt sensor to the pitch bend. 

Arm movements are transferred to my body and captured/processed by the horizontal tilt sensor, generating tone oscillations in real time


----------



## muziksculp

Cristian Labelli said:


> Thank you for your kind words, I appreciate it!
> I only used the BBC2 breath controller, assigning the horizontal tilt sensor to the pitch bend.
> 
> Arm movements are transferred to my body and captured/processed by the horizontal tilt sensor, generating tone oscillations in real time



Thanks for the feedback. Interesting, That's the first time I see this type of control in a video for vibrato, and it sounds very realistic. I thought you were using a leap motion, but your hand was over your keyboard, so that was a bit puzzling to me.


----------



## Fa

muziksculp said:


> Thanks for the feedback. Interesting, That's the first time I see this type of control in a video for vibrato, and it sounds very realistic. I thought you were using a leap motion, but your hand was over your keyboard, so that was a bit puzzling to me.


I had several experiences with the Leap Motion controller, but to be very honest, never satisfactory. The main issue being the light interference, but the way the MIDI processors were designed as well. 

The nice side of Cristian's idea is you just have one single device, and quite a bit of position freedom for your hand, because only movements, and not position, of the hand are transmitted to the TECcontrol. 
Interesting


----------



## DANIELE

Cristian Labelli said:


> Thank you for your kind words, I appreciate it!
> I only used the BBC2 breath controller, assigning the horizontal tilt sensor to the pitch bend.
> 
> Arm movements are transferred to my body and captured/processed by the horizontal tilt sensor, generating tone oscillations in real time



I was just thinking about using the other two controllers available on the TEC and this is a really good idea. Better than tilting the head while you are playing.

PS You are italian, aren't you?


----------



## RogiervG

what post processing did you apply? convo, algo reverbs, eq yes/no,etc...


----------



## Cristian Labelli

RogiervG said:


> what post processing did you apply? convo, algo reverbs, eq yes/no,etc...


Yes I used algorithmic reverbs for early reflections and convolution for the hall. 
All instruments are properly processed (eq, dyn.eq, maybe comp.) and organized into sub-groups. To add some "consistence"/"texture" I proceeded with parallel compressions and p. saturation.


----------



## philippe goi

Excerpt Mozart Divertimento en D Major Samplemodeling Strings ensemble
View attachment MOZART DIVERTIMENTO Samplemodeling Strings.mp4


----------



## x-dfo

philippe goi said:


> Excerpt Mozart Divertimento en D Major Samplemodeling Strings ensemble
> View attachment MOZART DIVERTIMENTO Samplemodeling Strings.mp4


How much eq'ing did you do on this?


----------



## Bollen

Cristian Labelli said:


> Hello everyone!
> Here is my last MIDI mockup, performed with Samplemodeling Solo & Ensemble Strings v1.1 and TEC Breath Controller BBC2.
> 
> Any feedback welcome



Utterly spectacular! I am blown away.... I am speechless... I, I... I have no words...😱


----------



## lychee

Bollen said:


> Utterly spectacular! I am blown away.... I am speechless... I, I... I have no words...😱



Lol, you are very talkative for someone who has no words.


----------



## Fa

philippe goi said:


> Excerpt Mozart Divertimento en D Major Samplemodeling Strings ensemble
> View attachment MOZART DIVERTIMENTO Samplemodeling Strings.mp4


Great job Philippe!


----------



## muziksculp

@philippe goi ,

Very nicely done, and that's quite a demanding piece to emulate by maestro Mozart. I really like the overall timbre, and dynamics of the strings. Thanks for sharing.

I think you can improve it a bit further if you introduce a bit of of tempo fluctuations (Ritardandos, and Accelerandros) in the piece, it sounds a bit too perfect/constant paced for a real performance, as far as the tempo is concerned.


----------



## philippe goi

Thank you for your feedback!
Indeed I left the BPM at 140 all the time.
I will realize a version 2 in the future with more variations on speed.
I will also try to exploit the timbral shapping and other controllers like the CC22 for transient harmonics ...
Regarding the equalization very few modifications , spacialisation in Parallax Audio Virtual sound stage to give even more warmth to the first reflections , position micro DECCA , hall Mozart for impulses responses .
Congratulations also to Cristian Labelli for his fabulous interpretation of Ennio Morricone , this gives meaning to the avant-garde and expressive potential regarding these strings .


----------



## lychee

Here is a little mockup of the Captain Harlock's Mayu theme by Seiji Yokoyama, to test my last two VSTI, SM Solo & Ensemble Strings and Wivi Woodwinds (until SM decides to make woodwinds).

I find that it sounds good apart from the cello, which sounds too thin in comparison with the original and this despite my attempts to modify the sound (IR, timbral shaping, low & hi positions ...).

Here the original:




I have other critics.
I find that it lacks an option like for Wivi, to exaggerate the humanization of the delay between each archers who compose the ensemble.
Here everyone seems to be playing perfectly synchronized, but attacks, legatos, portamentos should sometimes have a little delay between the participants.
I also find that the S&ES options really sound too subtle at times, sometimes we turn knobs and it feels like it doesn't change anything.


----------



## EmmCeeSq

Is there any way to get a proper staccato/spiccato attack with the S/M strings (I'm mainly using the ensemble strings) or is that just one of the limitations of this library? Currently I'm layering my Samplemodeling strings with other libraries (VSL/Spitfire), which is fine, they do the bulk of the work with getting me a nice proper attack, but it would be much nicer if my Samplemodeling section could join in. Even with Attack time (CC26) set to 0, there's just no 'bite' on the attacks at all. And rapid double bowing? No chance.

It would be great to know how to get this, if possible. The samplemodeling ensemble strings are great for long, lush string textures, but I feel they're pretty limited (for me) in terms of being able to get a good aggressive sound.

Appreciate any advice, even if it's just 'yeah, it's a limitation of the library, keep layering'

Cheers, Mike


----------



## I like music

EmmCeeSq said:


> Is there any way to get a proper staccato/spiccato attack with the S/M strings (I'm mainly using the ensemble strings) or is that just one of the limitations of this library? Currently I'm layering my Samplemodeling strings with other libraries (VSL/Spitfire), which is fine, they do the bulk of the work with getting me a nice proper attack, but it would be much nicer if my Samplemodeling section could join in. Even with Attack time (CC26) set to 0, there's just no 'bite' on the attacks at all. And rapid double bowing? No chance.
> 
> It would be great to know how to get this, if possible. The samplemodeling ensemble strings are great for long, lush string textures, but I feel they're pretty limited (for me) in terms of being able to get a good aggressive sound.
> 
> Appreciate any advice, even if it's just 'yeah, it's a limitation of the library, keep layering'
> 
> Cheers, Mike



Hey Mike. I'm trying to do the same. I used a combination of the overtones (kicked them up high on the short aggressive notes) + attack detuning to get a better sound. It still wasn't as aggressive as some of the sampled stuff I've heard, but it sounded fairly decent.

Have you tried adding those parameters? Are you able to share an audio of what you're doing? A few people might try to "work" on it if you post it.


----------



## EmmCeeSq

Oh, I hadn’t realised the overtones setting would affect the attack at all! Good call, I’ll give that a go. I’ll definitely post some stuff over the next couple of days or so - I really like working with the S/M stuff, so if I can bend it to my will that’ll be great. Thank you!!


----------



## I like music

EmmCeeSq said:


> Oh, I hadn’t realised the overtones setting would affect the attack at all! Good call, I’ll give that a go. I’ll definitely post some stuff over the next couple of days or so - I really like working with the S/M stuff, so if I can bend it to my will that’ll be great. Thank you!!



You might find that the overtones don't do it for you, but I did try them and I felt that they had an affect. Try a variation of CC values. I remember going up to 50-60 on a couple of notes and it did provide some variation. It might not do the trick for you, but a combination of that + attack detuning definitely helped. I seem to remember having my CC38 (attacks) at around 35-40 and that helped, in a specific context. However, I can't discern too much of a difference when I tweak that setting. I must be doing something wrong.


----------



## lychee

As I said above, there are a lot of parameters a bit too subtle for my taste, and the attack is one of them.
As SM S&ES is a different strings library, maybe we need to approach it differently.
So I did some tests using the parameters of attack to the maximum and conventionally, then I literally drawn the attack of my notes with the controller of expression.
The second solution seems more effective in terms of impact.






1 classic spicatto, 2 classic staccato, 3 drawn spicatto, 4 drawn staccato:


----------



## I like music

lychee said:


> As I said above, there are a lot of parameters a bit too subtle for my taste, and the attack is one of them.
> As SM S&ES is a different strings library, maybe we need to approach it differently.
> So I did some tests using the parameters of attack to the maximum and conventionally, then I literally drawn the attack of my notes with the controller of expression.
> The second solution seems more effective in terms of impact.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1 classic spicatto, 2 classic staccato, 3 drawn spicatto, 4 drawn staccato:



Hey! Sorry, I didn't quite understand the explanation. My apologies.

So on the final two examples in the audio are you saying that you had the velocity set to maximum, you had cc38 (attack) set to maximum?


----------



## lychee

I like music said:


> Hey! Sorry, I didn't quite understand the explanation. My apologies.
> 
> So on the final two examples in the audio are you saying that you had the velocity set to maximum, you had cc38 (attack) set to maximum?



The cc38 is used to change the attack from spiccato (zero) to staccato (127), on my image above you will see an automation to switch from one mode to another.
Then, I effectively put a big velocity, but it is especially the cc11 (the expression) which is important in my example (look at the bottom of the picture).
I drew a fast curve to cut the sound so the note is more punchy.
I think that the problem of S&ES is the release, even if we lower it in the parameters, it always seems to be present, and the technique of the cc11 makes it possible to attenuate that.


----------



## I like music

lychee said:


> The cc38 is used to change the attack from spiccato (zero) to staccato (127), on my image above you will see an automation to switch from one mode to another.
> Then, I effectively put a big velocity, but it is especially the cc11 (the expression) which is important in my example (look at the bottom of the picture).
> I drew a fast curve to cut the sound so the note is more punchy.
> I think that the problem of S&ES is the release, even if we lower it in the parameters, it always seems to be present, and the technique of the cc11 makes it possible to attenuate that.



Ahhhhh, yes. I see now. Very interesting. I was simply drawing very short notes with a high velocity + a very low Expression value. It seemed to do the trick up to a point. I'll most certainly try this. Thanks! It sounded better to my ears.


----------



## EmmCeeSq

Thanks for the tip Lychee. This sounds ok (and I've copied your technique, thanks so much for sharing). However, I'm still not convinced. It pales completely in comparison to my other libraries, and I'd never get approval on an attack so lacking in bite. I think S/M needs to address this. Also, having to muck around with CC11 after the fact so much really negates the single advantage that this type of approach has over sampling (namely, playability).

I've posted as much on the samplemodeling site (I know developers get a bit defensive when they get critical feedback, but I like this library and I'd like to use it more).

Let you know what I hear back.

Thanks for the advice and tips.

Mike


----------



## I like music

Does anyone know if there is a setting which affects the _volume_ of the transition? I've got an instance where the violins are doing a sort of portamento, but there's a dip in the volume. I'm wondering if the amount of dip can be controlled. 

Any help hugely appreciated!


----------



## Vardaro

Maybe the dip is intentional: most of us string players try to hide their portamentos!


----------



## I like music

Vardaro said:


> Maybe the dip is intentional: most of us string players try to hide their portamentos!



Haha. True about the portamentos.

I thought it might be the case. Sounds good enough to me. I just wondered if there was or wasn't some note on or note off / attack component that could accidentally affect this.


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

The dip in portamentos is intentional, and was modeled according to several examples of real portamentos. Here enclosed you will find a series of portamentos recorded with a real viola in the anechoic chamber. Almost all exhibit a quasi-triangular decrease in loudness ranging from 6 to 15 dB approximately.


----------



## I like music

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> The dip in portamentos is intentional, and was modeled according to several examples of real portamentos. Here enclosed you will find a series of portamentos recorded with a real viola in the anechoic chamber. Almost all exhibit a quasi-triangular decrease in loudness ranging from 6 to 15 dB approximately.


Amazing! Thanks for the explanation.


----------



## puremusic

Where from Wivi is the sound for the ocarina?


----------



## lychee

puremusic said:


> Where from Wivi is the sound for the ocarina?



- Off topic:
I don't have an ocarina in my set, so I'm replacing it with a Wivi recorder.
I recently bought Wivi, so I'm not in full control of it, but I think I can turn it into an ocarina.
- End of Off topic.


----------



## philippe goi

I continue the technical exploration of the Samplemodeling strings with this time the beginning of the quartet No 1 (1933) by Sergei Prokofieff .
Solo strings , lots of spicc techniques, stacc ... 
View attachment Samplemodeling STRINGS Prokofieff Quartet No 1 (1930 ).mp4


----------



## lychee

philippe goi said:


> I continue the technical exploration of the Samplemodeling strings with this time the beginning of the quartet No 1 (1933) by Sergei Prokofieff .
> Solo strings , lots of spicc techniques, stacc ...
> View attachment Samplemodeling STRINGS Prokofieff Quartet No 1 (1930 ).mp4


Very well executed, but on the other hand the sound is too loud and saturates at times.


----------



## robgb

philippe goi said:


> I continue the technical exploration of the Samplemodeling strings with this time the beginning of the quartet No 1 (1933) by Sergei Prokofieff .
> Solo strings , lots of spicc techniques, stacc ...
> View attachment Samplemodeling STRINGS Prokofieff Quartet No 1 (1930 ).mp4


I've gotta be completely honest here. This sounds about as close to the real thing as anything I've ever heard. The tone, the expressiveness. If I didn't know it was a sample library and I heard this in the wild, I would think it was the real thing. Now, I'm not a string player and my ears may not be as sophisticated as other people's ears—and I might have a different opinion if I heard real vs. memorex side by side—but I'm not really sure that matters.

Sample Modeling—please start thinking about woodwinds.


----------



## Woodie1972

A quick question: did you play everything in 'live', or did you enter the notes as in a score?


----------



## philippe goi

I play each instrument live with the USB MIDI Breath and Bite Controller 2. I then modify the CC2 curves, the vibrato ...


----------



## Woodie1972

Okay, thanks for the input. My 'problem' is that my keyboard skills aren't good enough to play it well enough.


----------



## robgb

Woodie1972 said:


> Okay, thanks for the input. My 'problem' is that my keyboard skills aren't good enough to play it well enough.


A little trick for so-so keyboard players like us: slow the tempo down while recording.


----------



## Monkey Man

Excellent effort, Philippe.


----------



## I like music

I wonder if there might be any plans for bow position e.g. sul tast and sul pont in these strings? Perhaps I've missed the option to emulate the sound. Would love to know if people are somehow recreating the effect, or whether the devs have any plans to add these?


----------



## muziksculp

Hello,

I have been experimenting with the Sample Modeling *Solo Cello*, and all I can say is that it sounds wonderful !

The amount of control, and sound shaping it offers is quite impressive. I have been tweaking the instrument IR to get a timbre I like, also tweaking the Instrument's harmonics via the Timbral Shaping CC#s. creates a lot of variations, very nice to have this much control over the instruments sonic character.

I'm using a Breath Controller, and having a lot of customizing options over the response via drawing my own response curves is another big plus.

For those who still think the Cello sounds a bit nasal (especially in the mid to high registers) Which was also my first impression when I played the Cello, I strongly recommend you experiment with the sound shaping tools, and the IR options it offers, I think it is set to CC100, I remapped it to CC89 becuase my Keyboard's Knobs CC# max value is 95 (not sure why Yamaha decided to do that) I use a Yamaha Montage 7 as my main Keyboard controller, being able to re-assing the CC# in this library is another big plus, and great for flexibility.

Another important parameters that has a big effect on the sound character are the Virtual Soundstage parameters, (Early Reflections, Pre-Delay, Distance).

I have all the Kontakt/Built-In Reverb parameters for the Instrument turned to zero (Disabled) . Since I prefer using my custom Reverbs. You can access these parameters via Controllers 7 page.

It does take some time to study the manual, and getting the right response from your controller, be it a keyboard, or BC, or ...I feel this is an important part of making sure you get optimal results from the instruments of this library. I still haven't experimented with some of the other realtime options such as the 'Attack Detuning', Dyn Modulation, Dynamics to Pitch, ....etc.. I could spend a few more days just getting to discover the Solo Cello of this library 

I will eventually venture into the other Solo Instruments, and then to the Ensembles of this library.

Finally, for those who have been using this library frequently, are you using it more for the Solo Instruments, or for the Ensembles ?

Thanks,
Muziksculp


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

Thanks, Musiksculp. You spotted the core of the problem.


----------



## muziksculp

Hi @Giorgio Tommasini ,

You are welcome, and Thank You very very much for developing this amazing library. I'm a very happy customer. 

I'm guessing you will be adding more features, and enhancements to it as it matures. 

Cheers,
Muziksculp


----------



## I like music

muziksculp said:


> Hello,
> 
> I have been experimenting with the Sample Modeling *Solo Cello*, and all I can say is that it sounds wonderful !
> 
> The amount of control, and sound shaping it offers is quite impressive. I have been tweaking the instrument IR to get a timbre I like, also tweaking the Instrument's harmonics via the Timbral Shaping CC#s. creates a lot of variations, very nice to have this much control over the instruments sonic character.
> 
> I'm using a Breath Controller, and having a lot of customizing options over the response via drawing my own response curves is another big plus.
> 
> For those who still think the Cello sounds a bit nasal (especially in the mid to high registers) Which was also my first impression when I played the Cello, I strongly recommend you experiment with the sound shaping tools, and the IR options it offers, I think it is set to CC100, I remapped it to CC89 becuase my Keyboard's Knobs CC# max value is 95 (not sure why Yamaha decided to do that) I use a Yamaha Montage 7 as my main Keyboard controller, being able to re-assing the CC# in this library is another big plus, and great for flexibility.
> 
> Another important parameters that has a big effect on the sound character are the Virtual Soundstage parameters, (Early Reflections, Pre-Delay, Distance).
> 
> I have all the Kontakt/Built-In Reverb parameters for the Instrument turned to zero (Disabled) . Since I prefer using my custom Reverbs. You can access these parameters via Controllers 7 page.
> 
> It does take some time to study the manual, and getting the right response from your controller, be it a keyboard, or BC, or ...I feel this is an important part of making sure you get optimal results from the instruments of this library. I still haven't experimented with some of the other realtime options such as the 'Attack Detuning', Dyn Modulation, Dynamics to Pitch, ....etc.. I could spend a few more days just getting to discover the Solo Cello of this library
> 
> I will eventually venture into the other Solo Instruments, and then to the Ensembles of this library.
> 
> Finally, for those who have been using this library frequently, are you using it more for the Solo Instruments, or for the Ensembles ?
> 
> Thanks,
> Muziksculp



Great to hear this. Any specific settings you've landed on when it comes to Timbral Shaping?

I found that the Distance setting had the most dramatic impact on how much I liked the sound of the strings. Once I threw on Quadrafuzz on these I was very happy.

I've been using Ensembles, and barely touched the solos (just because I've not written any music for solos yet).

Tons of options, and I'm learning some nice new tricks.

@Giorgio Tommasini I know customers always demand the world and more. I just wondered if there were any plans or considerations around sul tasto/ponticello bowing?


----------



## robgb

muziksculp said:


> Finally, for those who have been using this library frequently, are you using it more for the Solo Instruments, or for the Ensembles ?


I find I really love the solo instruments the most in this library, but I use the ensembles as well. As always, with a Sample Modeling library, you have to do a little work to get it sounding the way you want it to. And the fact that there are so many variables to play with makes it my goto strings library at this point.

Also, for those looking for a more aggressive tone, try throwing on the free OTT plugin. You can get some very interesting sounds with it.









OTT by Xfer Records - Plugins (VST, AU) | Splice


Get OTT by Xfer Records and learn how to use the plugin with Ableton Live, Logic, GarageBand, and FL Studio for free.




splice.com


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

I like music said:


> Great to hear this. Any specific settings you've landed on when it comes to Timbral Shaping?
> 
> I found that the Distance setting had the most dramatic impact on how much I liked the sound of the strings. Once I threw on Quadrafuzz on these I was very happy.
> 
> I've been using Ensembles, and barely touched the solos (just because I've not written any music for solos yet).
> 
> Tons of options, and I'm learning some nice new tricks.
> 
> @Giorgio Tommasini I know customers always demand the world and more. I just wondered if there were any plans or considerations around sul tasto/ponticello bowing?



I like music,

Dealing with sample-based instruments, there are only two possible approaches to "sul ponticello" and "sul tasto".

The first approach would require resampling all the instruments, chromatically, per dynamic and per articulation, editing and processing each sample, adding and programming the corresponding layers to each instrument and rewriting the scripts. The number of voices would be tripled, the CPU load would rise remarkably, and the costs of the whole undertaking would be, plainly stated, unbearable.

The second approach would involve modeling the current samples in real time to mimic the sound pattern of "sul ponticello" and "sul tasto". The task is not an easy one, and I'll try to explain why.

Here enclosed you will find an example of a continuous transition from a normal position to "sul ponticello", recorded with a real violin in the anechoic chamber. This transition involves basically three segments. The first clean segment evolves into a very unstable, out-of-Helmholtz sound, characterized by the virtual disappearance of the first two harmonics, by the presence of very strong interharmonics, and a very strong scratchy noise. This transitional phase is provoked by a mismatch between bow pressure/force. When a fully developed "sul ponticello"' sound is reached, the first two harmonics are still much lower, and all the other harmonics exhibit a very unstable, frequency and amplitude-modulated pattern. In addition, a strong, scratchy noise is still present.

Whether these features can be obtained by some fast modulation of the timbral shaper, using and additional noise layer is still subject to investigation. As I said, not an easy task. Mimicking "sul tasto" is probably easier, basically involving a spectral tilt with a prevalence of the first harmonics, plus some interharmonic content which might be achieved with the appropriate amount of overtones.

Thanks for asking,

Giorgio


----------



## I like music

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> I like music,
> 
> Dealing with sample-based instruments, there are only two possible approaches to "sul ponticello" and "sul tasto".
> 
> The first approach would require resampling all the instruments, chromatically, per dynamic and per articulation, editing and processing each sample, adding and programming the corresponding layers to each instrument and rewriting the scripts. The number of voices would be tripled, the CPU load would rise remarkably, and the costs of the whole undertaking would be, plainly stated, unbearable.
> 
> The second approach would involve modeling the current samples in real time to mimic the sound pattern of "sul ponticello" and "sul tasto". The task is not an easy one, and I'll try to explain why.
> 
> Here enclosed you will find an example of a continuous transition from a normal position to "sul ponticello", recorded with a real violin in the anechoic chamber. This transition involves basically three segments. The first clean segment evolves into a very unstable, out-of-Helmholtz sound, characterized by the virtual disappearance of the first two harmonics, by the presence of very strong interharmonics, and a very strong scratchy noise. This transitional phase is provoked by a mismatch between bow pressure/force. When a fully developed "sul ponticello"' sound is reached, the first two harmonics are still much lower, and all the other harmonics exhibit a very unstable, frequency and amplitude-modulated pattern. In addition, a strong, scratchy noise is still present.
> 
> Whether these features can be obtained by some fast modulation of the timbral shaper, using and additional noise layer is still subject to investigation. As I said, not an easy task. Mimicking "sul tasto" is probably easier, basically involving a spectral tilt with a prevalence of the first harmonics, plus some interharmonic content which might be achieved with the appropriate amount of overtones.
> 
> Thanks for asking,
> 
> Giorgio



Thanks so much for the detailed answer. I really appreciate it. I shall check out the sound examples shortly, but for now this makes sense (as much as my mind can get around the technical difficulty of doing all of this).

Wish more developers would let us have a peak into some of the things they know. I think it is an important thing for non-developers to see and understand some of the things that developers have to think about when creating libraries.

EDIT: will spend some more time with the libraries and see what I can get through some timbral tweaking!


----------



## DANIELE

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> I like music,
> 
> Dealing with sample-based instruments, there are only two possible approaches to "sul ponticello" and "sul tasto".
> 
> The first approach would require resampling all the instruments, chromatically, per dynamic and per articulation, editing and processing each sample, adding and programming the corresponding layers to each instrument and rewriting the scripts. The number of voices would be tripled, the CPU load would rise remarkably, and the costs of the whole undertaking would be, plainly stated, unbearable.
> 
> The second approach would involve modeling the current samples in real time to mimic the sound pattern of "sul ponticello" and "sul tasto". The task is not an easy one, and I'll try to explain why.
> 
> Here enclosed you will find an example of a continuous transition from a normal position to "sul ponticello", recorded with a real violin in the anechoic chamber. This transition involves basically three segments. The first clean segment evolves into a very unstable, out-of-Helmholtz sound, characterized by the virtual disappearance of the first two harmonics, by the presence of very strong interharmonics, and a very strong scratchy noise. This transitional phase is provoked by a mismatch between bow pressure/force. When a fully developed "sul ponticello"' sound is reached, the first two harmonics are still much lower, and all the other harmonics exhibit a very unstable, frequency and amplitude-modulated pattern. In addition, a strong, scratchy noise is still present.
> 
> Whether these features can be obtained by some fast modulation of the timbral shaper, using and additional noise layer is still subject to investigation. As I said, not an easy task. Mimicking "sul tasto" is probably easier, basically involving a spectral tilt with a prevalence of the first harmonics, plus some interharmonic content which might be achieved with the appropriate amount of overtones.
> 
> Thanks for asking,
> 
> Giorgio



If I understand well it is very difficult to replicate the unstability of the pattern you have with a full developed sul ponticello articulation, plus the addition of other sounds layers to get the right sound. It is very difficult to "program" a unstable pattern if you doesn't know the rule behind it, it reminds me a bit of "Nonlinear dynamic systems" exam I did at the university years ago. The professor asked me to solve the vibration equation of a clarinet's reed...I will not say more.


----------



## muziksculp

Hi,

Given that Samplemodeling instruments use a very small sample based core, MBs not GBs. I was wondering if Samplemodeling used a larger number of samples in their instruments, would this improve the overall realism, or timbre ? or this won't matter, or make a difference ? just curious on how the sample core of a Samplemodeling library is being used, or for what exactly.

I also wonder if Samplemodeling had their own modeling player/engine instead of using Kontakt, would that help them be more flexible, and offer even more functionality, and realism, and have better GUI design than using Kontakt ? Audio Modeling use SWAM as their player, so just curious why Samplemodeling don't have their own player.

Thanks,
Muziksculp


----------



## robgb

muziksculp said:


> Given that Samplemodeling instruments use a very small sample based core, MBs not GBs. I was wondering if Samplemodeling used a larger number of samples in their instruments, would this improve the overall realism, or timbre ? or this won't matter, or make a difference ?


I have zero inside knowledge, but I suspect that part of the reason they do it the way they do is to lessen the strain on computer resources. If you go GBs, the footprint will be considerably larger and the results may not be significantly better enough to warrant this. And, honestly, as far as I'm concerned, they've got the overall realism and timbre down cold. I think sound and playability of their stuff is well beyond most libraries.


----------



## muziksculp

robgb said:


> I have zero inside knowledge, but I suspect that part of the reason they do it the way they do is to lessen the strain on computer resources. If you go GBs, the footprint will be considerably larger and the results may not be significantly better enough to warrant this. And, honestly, as far as I'm concerned, they've got the overall realism and timbre down cold. I think sound and playability of their stuff is well beyond most libraries.



I'm thinking more sample content in the MBs not GBs. So.. Just a bit more sample content than what they have now, but then this might not have any impact on quality, their technology is a big mystery to me.

I feel they are already a big breakthrough today in terms of realism, flexibilty, realtime playability, ..etc. I also think they are the future of this field, along with what Audio Modeling is doing with their SWAM system.

Why Samplemodeling doesn't have their own dedicated physical modeling engine, and decide to use Kontakt is another big mystery to me. Maybe they have plans to change this in the future.

All I know is that after purchasing their Solo & Ensemble Strings library, which is the first and only library I have from Samplemodeling, I have become a big fan of their technology, I'm very impressed, they surely have a bright future as a company, and I'm already tempted to buy their brass bundle, or at least their Trumpet library in the near future.


----------



## robgb

muziksculp said:


> and I'm already tempted to buy their brass bundle, or at least their Trumpet library in the near future.


Their brass is amazing. The only drawback, unless I'm missing something, is the inability to have polyphonic ensembles. To fix this, I've created my own multi with a freely available divisi script added. Works like a charm.


----------



## muziksculp

robgb said:


> Their brass is amazing. The only drawback, unless I'm missing something, is the inability to have polyphonic ensembles. To fix this, I've created my own multi with a freely available divisi script added. Works like a charm.



Thanks for the feedback. 

That's not a drawback for me, since I'm more interested in the Solo Brass Instruments, especially the Trumpet, and Trombone. I would use other sample libraries for ensemble brass.


----------



## vicontrolu

Robgp can you please post a link to the divisi script? Tried many but none of them actually worked "like a charm"


----------



## DANIELE

muziksculp said:


> I'm thinking more sample content in the MBs not GBs. So.. Just a bit more sample content than what they have now, but then this might not have any impact on quality, their technology is a big mystery to me.
> 
> I feel they are already a big breakthrough today in terms of realism, flexibilty, realtime playability, ..etc. I also think they are the future of this field, along with what Audio Modeling is doing with their SWAM system.
> 
> Why Samplemodeling doesn't have their own dedicated physical modeling engine, and decide to use Kontakt is another big mystery to me. Maybe they have plans to change this in the future.
> 
> All I know is that after purchasing their Solo & Ensemble Strings library, which is the first and only library I have from Samplemodeling, I have become a big fan of their technology, I'm very impressed, they surely have a bright future as a company, and I'm already tempted to buy their brass bundle, or at least their Trumpet library in the near future.



Doing his own gui and physical modeled engine could be expensive (it requires a lot of programming and testing) so maybe they have plans to do it in the future but actually they rely on Kontakt to be able to concentrate on the libraries.


----------



## robgb

vicontrolu said:


> Robgp can you please post a link to the divisi script? Tried many but none of them actually worked "like a charm"


I'm using version 6.26, but here's a link to 6.28.






Multi Divisi Script v6.5


Multi Divisi Script v6.5 This multiscript takes incoming polyphonic midi data and divides it between (up-to) six (monophonic) instruments. v6.5 added: Note Off Delay (NOD) can sometimes help with stuck notes in heavily scripted instruments. User assignable CCs for various controls Many...




vi-control.net


----------



## I like music

How are people doing with SM strings and trills (sections)? This is one area where I feel we could definitely get some improvement. The trilling stays too in-sync (whereas I _think_ in a real section a few players fall out of sync). So as it stands, you can hear each note change and it doesn't smother/blur in the way I think trills (and finger tremolos) should.

Just some feedback.

[EDIT] How weird. I don't normally ever play anything in. Always draw it in. I just tried to do a trill using my keyboard and it sounded _way_ better than what I had drawn in. I need to investigate why. Must be spacing them wrong in the editor or something.


----------



## DANIELE

I like music said:


> How are people doing with SM strings and trills (sections)? This is one area where I feel we could definitely get some improvement. The trilling stays too in-sync (whereas I _think_ in a real section a few players fall out of sync). So as it stands, you can hear each note change and it doesn't smother/blur in the way I think trills (and finger tremolos) should.
> 
> Just some feedback.
> 
> [EDIT] How weird. I don't normally ever play anything in. Always draw it in. I just tried to do a trill using my keyboard and it sounded _way_ better than what I had drawn in. I need to investigate why. Must be spacing them wrong in the editor or something.



This is because the trill timings are not the same for all the duration of the trill. In one of my last tracks I recorded a brass trill manually, it was very irregular and not exactly in time but it sounded awesome.
Try to record many trills ad then look at the notes to understand the secret behind the human imperfection.


----------



## I like music

Version 1.2 released! I haven't read the release notes as I'm just gearing up for work and want to read them properly later. Would love to hear if people saw +ve stuff come out of the update.


----------



## DANIELE

I like music said:


> Version 1.2 released! I haven't read the release notes as I'm just gearing up for work and want to read them properly later. Would love to hear if people saw +ve stuff come out of the update.



You anticipated me, I was just about to writing it. I will look at the changelog this evening, I'm very happy to see another update.

EDIT

Ok, I wasn't able to wait. Great for the tremolo fix, I noticed it has some strange behavior, I will try the new version asap.

I'm also interested in the time spread for the ensemble patches, I'm curios to hear the results.


----------



## decredis

I'll be curious to see if the lack of bow noise on solo viola (iirc) has been fixed, I don't think I see that specifically mentioned in the notes. Look forward to trying out improvements to attack that are mentioned.


----------



## I like music

decredis said:


> I'll be curious to see if the lack of bow noise on solo viola (iirc) has been fixed, I don't think I see that specifically mentioned in the notes. Look forward to trying out improvements to attack that are mentioned.


Oh yes. I remember that now. Fingers crossed!


----------



## DANIELE

decredis said:


> I'll be curious to see if the lack of bow noise on solo viola (iirc) has been fixed, I don't think I see that specifically mentioned in the notes. Look forward to trying out improvements to attack that are mentioned.



This is the first thing I thinked about and I didn't see it in the release notes!


----------



## jonnybutter

I like music said:


> How are people doing with SM strings and trills (sections)? This is one area where I feel we could definitely get some improvement. The trilling stays too in-sync (whereas I _think_ in a real section a few players fall out of sync). So as it stands, you can hear each note change and it doesn't smother/blur in the way I think trills (and finger tremolos) should.
> 
> Just some feedback.
> 
> [EDIT] How weird. I don't normally ever play anything in. Always draw it in. I just tried to do a trill using my keyboard and it sounded _way_ better than what I had drawn in. I need to investigate why. Must be spacing them wrong in the editor or something.



My experience is that playing it in well usually beats programming it in, esp on a very expressive instrument like SM strings. And if you listen to great orchestra performances - esp. in the classical style - where the room is relatively dry and the playing precise, 10-20 string players do some of those ornaments very deftly and mostly together. I think the idea is to make it sound played in if possible!


----------



## I like music

jonnybutter said:


> My experience is that playing it in well usually beats programming it in, esp on a very expressive instrument like SM strings. And if you listen to great orchestra performances - esp. in the classical style - where the room is relatively dry and the playing precise, 10-20 string players do some of those ornaments very deftly and mostly together. I think the idea is to make it sound played in if possible!



This makes sense. Unfortunately my playing skills are non-existent, but mainly the fact that I half a 1/2 second latency on my machine means that even if I could play, it'd be nearly impossible. In the end, I did play it in for trills and the result was much better.


----------



## jonnybutter

My hat is off to you dealing with that kind of latency!


----------



## I like music

jonnybutter said:


> My hat is off to you dealing with that kind of latency!



Wish someone would tell my wife what I have to deal with. Half a second latency is an eternity :D


----------



## DANIELE

I like music said:


> This makes sense. Unfortunately my playing skills are non-existent, but mainly the fact that I half a 1/2 second latency on my machine means that even if I could play, it'd be nearly impossible. In the end, I did play it in for trills and the result was much better.



Wow it is a lot! With my new CPU I'm able to go with 256 buffer size playing many track at once!!


----------



## I like music

DANIELE said:


> Wow it is a lot! With my new CPU I'm able to go with 256 buffer size playing many track at once!!



Yeah I'm on 2048 in terms of buffer. Works fine for me generally though, since I always always write it in with a mouse, so it doesn't matter at that point. Yeah, it is a pain in the ass when you have to work things out and then I do wish the latency was down.

I think I'll buy a computer in a couple of years and this time I'll make sure it is a good one. Might be life-changing!


----------



## muziksculp

Ver. 1.2 Update Notes :

*New features*

*Optimized temporal dispersion of ensemble modules.*
It has been reported by some that the ensembles sounded too tight. We accordingly increased their temporal spread, maintaining some restriction at higher velocities to allow for fast repetitions.
*New fast attacks and accents under CC26 & CC27 control. *
The way these controllers influence short attacks and accents has been optimized. Now, fast and short attacks are more easily obtained using high velocities and low CC26 and CC27 values.
*New off-the-string vs. on-the-string release control.*
The basic principle remains the same. CC27, if above 64, controls the length of off-the-string release. If below 64, the length of on-the-string release. However, both the timbre and the length of the latter have been optimized, to allow for more realistic and much shorter releases. This permits short, fast repetitions to be more easily accomplished.
*New slap pizzicato (Bartok) for the Cello, Solo & Ensemble.*
Slap pizzicato was reported to enter abruptly above a certain velocity. Moreover, the sound was much too noisy and devoid of harmonic components. This has been fixed in this new update.
*Important fixes*

*Microtuning erratic loading of presets.*
In v1.1 Microtuning presets were erratically loaded. This has been fixed in this update. Presets are correctly recalled by KS B0 and KS C1-C2. Dynamic microtuning is now working using KS B0 + sustain pedal + KS C1 - C2 (in Cello and DBass B-1 C0 - C1).
*Correct positioning of CC7 in the Remapping menu (Ensemble Instruments only).*
In v1.1 remapping of Volume (default CC7) was positioned in the leftmost part of the instrument GUI. This might lead to the impression that remapping of volume was unavailable. This has been corrected in v. 1.2. Remapping of volume is now correctly positioned in CC Remapping 4 page, below Expr. Vibrato.
*Repeated bichords when CC27 was set to 64 yielded erratic behavior and missing notes.*
Fixed.
*Other fixes*

*The instruments utilize a series of CCs, namely CC41, CC113, CC121 for internal use. These midi controllers were previously unshielded, and could yield unwanted side effects if transmitted from external midi devices.*
Fixed.
*Remapping dynamics to CC1 and vibrato rate to another CC in the ensembles provoked a persisting CC11 warning.*
Fixed.
*Several other remapping issues.*
Fixed.
*Exiting tremolo lead to erratic note stop.*
Fixed.


----------



## robgb

decredis said:


> I'll be curious to see if the lack of bow noise on solo viola (iirc) has been fixed, I don't think I see that specifically mentioned in the notes. Look forward to trying out improvements to attack that are mentioned.


I'm hearing bow noise.


----------



## robgb

My first impression of 1.2 so far (and I've only checked violins) is that, for lack of a better term, it sounds a little more "ballsy" than the previous version. I think the loosening up of the temporal dispersion helps this. Or I could be completely nuts.

UPDATE: I don't know if they changed anything, but the solo cello sounds absolutely gorgeous.


----------



## DANIELE

robgb said:


> My first impression of 1.2 so far (and I've only checked violins) is that, for lack of a better term, it sounds a little more "ballsy" than the previous version. I think the loosening up of the temporal dispersion helps this.



I did just a very little try but I like it, now it seems you can hear better the players of the ensemble. The sound seems wider, I'll do more tests.


----------



## I like music

I won't have the chance to play with these for a few days. Would love to hear some examples, or more opinions of what existing owners are hearing!


----------



## muziksculp

Hi,

It would be nice to read some feedback regarding the improvements ver. 1.2 offered, and maybe some demos clips. 

I installed ver. 1.2, but I haven't had the time to discover the improvements it offers yet, I plan to spend some quality time with it as soon as I have the time to dedicate to it, and hopefully post some audio examples. 

Thanks,
Muziksculp


----------



## Windbag

I would love to hear some quickie samples of 1.2 if any of you get a chance....still lingering on the sidelines with this one. As tantalizing as 1-patch-per-section strings are, particularly for writing, I haven't been convinced by the examples I've heard thus far and am very interested in the ongoing development. 

Cheers


----------



## timbit2006

Does anyone have any idea on when the pandemic sale ends?


----------



## DANIELE

Ok, I did some more testing and I must say that the larger spread of the strings is great for many kind of passages but if you try a measured termolo it sounds less defined, the notes are blurry compared to the V1.1. I did a direct comparison and I hear it, now it is almost impossible to do a realistic measured tremolo, especially with low dynamics.
Maybe I'm doing something wrong, this is what I did:


I put the velocity all the way up;
I put attack and release near to 0;
I put the attack intensity all the way up;
The dynamics are under 50% (let's say 40% of the dynamic range);
I wrote D4 1/16 notes and I shortened them a bit to avoid them to be too close to each other.;
I'm using 150 bpm for this test.
Could someone try this or even try to write a measured tremolo and let me know if I'm doing wrong?

I love this articulation and with V 1.1 I was able to achieve it a lot better and very easily.

Here a quick render, you can hear v1.1 pause v1.2 then again v1.1 and v1.2 without pausing. I'm using the V1 ensemble patch. No differences in writing nor in CC programming. Both are the same MIDI item played with v1.1 and v1.2.

Any help is appreciated, thank you.


----------



## rojarvi

timbit2006 said:


> Does anyone have any idea on when the pandemic sale ends?


I don’t know but I hope they announce it clearly and well before ending it. My toes still hurt because I dropped my jaw on them when I heard that Morricone mockup by Cristian. 👏


----------



## DANIELE

DANIELE said:


> Ok, I did some more testing and I must say that the larger spread of the strings is great for many kind of passages but if you try a measured termolo it sounds less defined, the notes are blurry compared to the V1.1. I did a direct comparison and I hear it, now it is almost impossible to do a realistic measured tremolo, especially with low dynamics.
> Maybe I'm doing something wrong, this is what I did:
> 
> 
> I put the velocity all the way up;
> I put attack and release near to 0;
> I put the attack intensity all the way up;
> The dynamics are under 50% (let's say 40% of the dynamic range);
> I wrote D4 1/16 notes and I shortened them a bit to avoid them to be too close to each other.;
> I'm using 150 bpm for this test.
> Could someone try this or even try to write a measured tremolo and let me know if I'm doing wrong?
> 
> I love this articulation and with V 1.1 I was able to achieve it a lot better and very easily.
> 
> Here a quick render, you can hear v1.1 pause v1.2 then again v1.1 and v1.2 without pausing. I'm using the V1 ensemble patch. No differences in writing nor in CC programming. Both are the same MIDI item played with v1.1 and v1.2.
> 
> Any help is appreciated, thank you.



I quote myself, is there anyone that could try it? It is pretty quick and simple to do.


----------



## robgb

DANIELE said:


> I quote myself, is there anyone that could try it? It is pretty quick and simple to do.


I'm not really sure what you're looking for. Both actually sound fine to me, although 1.2 is probably a slightly more realistic version. But if you're looking for a sharper, more defined sound, then consider using something like the free OTT plugin to give it some definition. Here's a before and after. The second version has OTT added to the track.


----------



## DANIELE

robgb said:


> I'm not really sure what you're looking for. Both actually sound fine to me, although 1.2 is probably a slightly more realistic version. But if you're looking for a sharper, more defined sound, then consider using something like the free OTT plugin to give it some definition. Here's a before and after. The second version has OTT added to the track.



Thank you, what settings did you use for OTT?

I'll try later.

Anyway in my example the measured tremolo in 1.2 need to sounds sharper, it is too blurry but in your example sounds better. Did you use full dynamics?


----------



## robgb

DANIELE said:


> Anyway in my example the measured tremolo in 1.2 need to sounds sharper, it is too blurry but in your example sounds better. Did you use full dynamics?


Yes, full dynamics. But only half velocity.

Here are the OTT settings:






Here it is again with the dynamics lower to around 50% or less.


----------



## Peter Siedlaczek

Daniele,

Extending the "spread" of the ensembles was the most requested feature by many users. It was deemed necessary to avoid the impression of too tight and "mechanical" attacks and legatos. We believe that this increased spread, which progressively reduces at higher velocities, led to an overall improvement of the most used playing techniques and articulations, including tremolo, which is now more homogeneous, more "blurry", what´s typical for a "normal" tremolo.

Measured tremolo is of course a very particular articulation, and it is a completely different story. Since the spread of the ensemble in v. 1.1 is tighter, under some particular circumstances tremolo may remind a measured tremolo, simply because it is more regular. An approach which might be considered to overcome this issue is to mimic measured tremolo by playing fast repetitions instead of Keyswitch E. However, please consider the following:

The higher the velocity, the tighter the timing (less spread), so the repetition (measured tremolo) should be played with maximum velocity. This approach will require, however, a modification of the default settings, due to the parameter "velocity to dynamics" (CC25), which is usually set to 127. When using this default setting, the highest velocity leads to the highest initial dynamics, what would kill the intended dynamics set by CC11. Therefore, for your task, it´s necessary to set CC25 to zero, to allow playing the intended dynamics (set by CC11) even at the highest velocity, from the very beginning of each note. Playing the highest velocity allows a much better control over the properties of the single bow strokes. Please try not only various CC26 and CC27 settings, but, first of all, different note lengths, which should not be too short. By doing so one might obtain much better results than those demonstrated in your example.

Peter


----------



## DANIELE

robgb said:


> Yes, full dynamics. But only half velocity.
> 
> Here are the OTT settings:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here it is again with the dynamics lower to around 50% or less.



Ok, I'm going to try that.



Peter Siedlaczek said:


> Daniele,
> 
> Extending the "spread" of the ensembles was the most requested feature by many users. It was deemed necessary to avoid the impression of too tight and "mechanical" attacks and legatos. We believe that this increased spread, which progressively reduces at higher velocities, led to an overall improvement of the most used playing techniques and articulations, including tremolo, which is now more homogeneous, more "blurry", what´s typical for a "normal" tremolo.
> 
> Measured tremolo is of course a very particular articulation, and it is a completely different story. Since the spread of the ensemble in v. 1.1 is tighter, under some particular circumstances tremolo may remind a measured tremolo, simply because it is more regular. An approach which might be considered to overcome this issue is to mimic measured tremolo by playing fast repetitions instead of Keyswitch E. However, please consider the following:
> 
> The higher the velocity, the tighter the timing (less spread), so the repetition (measured tremolo) should be played with maximum velocity. This approach will require, however, a modification of the default settings, due to the parameter "velocity to dynamics" (CC25), which is usually set to 127. When using this default setting, the highest velocity leads to the highest initial dynamics, what would kill the intended dynamics set by CC11. Therefore, for your task, it´s necessary to set CC25 to zero, to allow playing the intended dynamics (set by CC11) even at the highest velocity, from the very beginning of each note. Playing the highest velocity allows a much better control over the properties of the single bow strokes. Please try not only various CC26 and CC27 settings, but, first of all, different note lengths, which should not be too short. By doing so one might obtain much better results than those demonstrated in your example.
> 
> Peter



Thank you Peter, please don't misunderstand me, I love the spread improvement you did, I'm only try to understand what could I do to get all I want, just because I know your library is capable of many things.

I'm trying to look for some measured tremolo ensemble examples on YouTube but it is not so common. I usually like to know how the real thing works just to be sure to work for the best result.

That said, in my example I'm already using velocity at 127 just to be sure it is not a velocity fault, and regarding the CC25 this is also at 0 because I love to control everything with CC2 (I use a breath controller so CC2 is my default).

I tried with different note lengths just paying attention to not overlap them of course.

I still didn't try normal tremolo so I'm not talking about that, I love measured tremolo because is very useful to achieve subtle accompaignment in many situations and mostly because of the control you have on the notes and the time syncronization.

I'll do some other tests using your advices and robgb ones and I'll let you know, thank you for your help.


----------



## muziksculp

@Peter Siedlaczek ,

Hi,

Thanks for the feedback regarding version 1.2 .

It would be great if you can implement a Niente feature for both the Solo & Ens. Strings. Currently they don't fade to complete silence when I use expression, or CC2 if I'm using a Breath Controller.

Looking forward to test Solo & Ens. Strings ver 1.2, and see more improvements offered in future updates.

Thanks,
Muziksculp


----------



## timbit2006

rojarvi said:


> I don’t know but I hope they announce it clearly and well before ending it. My toes still hurt because I dropped my jaw on them when I heard that Morricone mockup by Cristian. 👏


I e-mailed them last night, there's no clear end date but they said that unfortunately when the pandemic is over the sale will be over since it's not really a traditional sale anyways. I guess I'll be safe to buy the strings this week but I wonder if they will let us know in advance, I wouldn't mind getting the brass library next month as well. Definitely better to get it sooner than later though.


----------



## muziksculp

timbit2006 said:


> I wouldn't mind getting the woodwinds library next month as well



Hmmm...Sample Modeling will be releasing Woodwind Libraries next month ? Where did you hear about that ?

They currently have Brass, and Strings, but no Woodwinds.


----------



## robgb

muziksculp said:


> Hmmm...Sample Modeling will be releasing Woodwind Libraries next month ? Where did you hear about that ?


I think he/she is confusing it with Audio Modeling woodwinds, since SM used to carry them. It's my understanding that SM is not currently developing woodwinds. I'm sure they'll correct me if I'm wrong.


----------



## timbit2006

muziksculp said:


> Hmmm...Sample Modeling will be releasing Woodwind Libraries next month ? Where did you hear about that ?
> 
> They currently have Brass, and Strings, but no Woodwinds.





robgb said:


> I think he/she is confusing it with Audio Modeling woodwinds, since SM used to carry them. It's my understanding that SM is not currently developing woodwinds. I'm sure they'll correct me if I'm wrong.


Nope I was just temporarily dumb and meant to say "brass". I'll edit my post


----------



## DANIELE

Ok I did some other tests but I must say I prefer v1.1 for measured tremolo. I tried all the things you adviced.

I tried also with violas 1.2 and it doesn't sound sharp enough for me, the violins sound a little better.

Never mind, I'll stick with 1.1 for measured tremolo and I'll use 1.2 for other things. This breaks my rule 1 instrument - 1 track but I think I can survive.  

I will keep testing, maybe I'll reach something good for me.


----------



## Vardaro

Well, I find the new versions closer to the real thing.....


----------



## philippe goi

Concerto en la J-S BACH Samplemodeling Strings vers 1.2b (mix Parallax audio virtual sound stage and altiverb church irs )
View attachment BACH Concerto en la Samplemodeling STRINGS.mp4


----------



## Windbag

Nice job yet again, Philippe...Bravo and thanks for sharing.

This is pretty close to convincing me...I hear fewer and fewer of the moments that stood out to me in earlier examples as, well...plastic, for lack of a better term. How much of this do you attribute to software improvement vs. your own familiarity with the library and how best to control it? 

Do you play these parts in or draw them...or both? 

I have seen brief mention of Roli-compatible pitch sensitivity in one of the walk-through videos; Has anyone gotten as far as playing in vibrato on the solo instruments? Does that work?


----------



## VivianaSings

philippe goi said:


> Concerto en la J-S BACH Samplemodeling Strings vers 1.2b (mix Parallax audio virtual sound stage and altiverb church irs )
> View attachment BACH Concerto en la Samplemodeling STRINGS.mp4



It sounds good but the one thing that's throwing me off is that weird noise on the last sustained note - the E. There's like a white noise mixed in with that note that stops when the note stops. Anyone know what that's about? It's at 1:31 on the video.


----------



## Windbag

I believe there is a bow noise component you can dial in/out via CC; I'm guessing that's what you're hearing there.


----------



## philippe goi

Thanks for the reviews , I take pleasure as a user to push the expressiveness of this collection of strings .
What I like here is to be able to create very flexible melodic lines in game technique in a short time , I play in real time the performances with the Breath controller TEC , I then refine by drawing other controllers . 
It is necessary to humanize the performances, a violinist sculpts in permanance the sound of the strings, nothing is static, it is perhaps the most complex thing to achieve in programming to arrive again at a higher realism .
This collection is part of the string instruments rubbed very innovative in terms of expressiveness and total control .
Regarding the tone of this collection, we must try the different irs provided in the bank, maybe we will have in the future new body irs. 
For my part I use the dry presets , and I apply Virtual sound stage of Parallax audio to warm up the bank again for the first reflexions in the room , and I add a concert hall impulse .
The latest update 1.2 1.2b gives even more features in attack control, time dispersion ...
I’ll take the time to test all these things! 
Regarding the noise around 1.31 I think I have accentuated the Bow noises too much! I will look at this ... Thank you


----------



## Max Bonsi

Hi
I tried to to my best with the ensemble patches
here are the first 4 bars of Prokofiev Symphony n.1 (2 Larghetto)
Hope to hear from you about it
thanks!!

Max


----------



## rojarvi

Thanks for excellent demos, guys! I spent some time going through solo strings demos from various vendors - mostly concentrating on cello. There are many very good options nowadays available. For example, Chris Hein and Emotional stuff from Best Service sound very convincing. Both of them are excellent sound-wise but do not offer as good control over vibrato as SM. At least to me the LFO-based vibrato of CH did not sound as natural and I guess Emotional Cello has only baked-in vibratos (which sound good if you don't want total control over it).

I find it very impressive what people have been able to do with SM strings.


----------



## GNP

Yes, this new technology between synthesis and sampling is seriously impressive, and makes way too much sense too.


----------



## philippe goi

New example , Villa-Lobos in solo strings .
Techniques Det , stacc , pizz , col-legno . 
View attachment VILLA-LOBOS Brincadeira SampleModeling Strings.mp4


----------



## muziksculp

@philippe goi ,

Thanks for posting this, it sounds Wonderful. 

I really like the more aggressive bowing, lots of character in the shorts, it sounds very realistic. Great for some Tango music. i.e. Astor Piazzolla. 

Do you find 1.2 better than 1.1 for producing these types of bowings both for the solos instruments, and ensembles ?


----------



## Windbag

This is pretty incredible. What's especially interesting to me is that while I wouldn't likely mistake this for a recording of live players, the composition and subtleties of the interpretation and performance stand out well before any such comparative thought process. That's a pretty major step...this music is the goal, after all. 

It looks like you have independent tracks for pizzicato...is that for convenience? Are those keyswitchable articulations if one wanted to keep each instrument to a single track?


----------



## Bollen

Windbag said:


> It looks like you have independent tracks for pizzicato...is that for convenience? Are those keyswitchable articulations if one wanted to keep each instrument to a single track?


@philippe goi I'm curious about this too...?


----------



## philippe goi

Thanks for your feedback , version 1.2 really gives even more flexibility and bite for quick attacks , for pizz I create individual tracks for a practical side , it saves me from using keyswitch and having a track only with pizz in programming. The flexibility to draw very subtle attacks and the strength of this bank, the expressiveness and emotion of timbral takes meaning with a little work .


----------



## PerryD

Something not so orchestral using Solo & Ensemble Strings.  Hey, we can paint any picture we want, right?


----------



## muziksculp

Hi,

I'm still experimenting, and discovering this deep, and quite flexible strings library. 

For those using it with a Breath Controller, do you have CC#25 (Velocity to Dynamics) set to Zero ?

Or, do you dial in a small amount for CC#25 so that both your Breath Controller, and Key Velocity affect the dynamics while you play the keys ?

The user manual recommends setting CC#25 to Zero if you are using a B-Controller.

I find it useful to be able to control dynamics with both options simultaneously, for max flexibility.

Thanks,
Muziksculp


----------



## timbit2006

Does anyone have any legit idea on when the pandemic sale will end? I'm 100% interested in the brass after being amazed by the strings but of course this month is competitive on what gets the wallet so for sure if it was until the middle of December it might help some of us out


----------



## muziksculp

timbit2006 said:


> Does anyone have any legit idea on when the pandemic sale will end?



I guess when the Pandemic Ends. They don't have any info. on when it will end, since they don't know when it will end.


----------



## timbit2006

muziksculp said:


> I guess when the Pandemic Ends. They don't have any info. on when it will end, since they don't know when it will end.


I don't know if I want to be put in the awkward position where I'm subconciously hoping the pandemic lasts longer so I can take advantage of a sale


----------



## muziksculp

I just got their Brass Bundle a few days ago, I haven't installed it yet, but I'm sure I will enjoy using their Brass Instruments, it's a great value given the number of solo brass instruments you get, and they are very popular. 

love their Solo & Ens. Strings.


----------



## NYC Composer

Does anyone have a link to the pandemic sale? I didn’t see it on their site.


----------



## timbit2006

NYC Composer said:


> Does anyone have a link to the pandemic sale? I didn’t see it on their site.


It's just on their buy page. 100euro off the bundles.


----------



## muziksculp

Hi,

OK, another question for SM Solo & Ens. Strings users. 

There are so many CC#'s to work with, and control the various parameters of the strings. Some can be dialed in with a value to set it at, and leave it constant at that setting, others are more dynamic, which can be edited/automated via a additional editing iterations in your DAW. 

Which CC#'s do you find to be the most useful, and critical to use when recording a performance in real time besides expression, and vibrato that can have a very positive influence on the sound, and realism factors ? 

Thanks,
Muziksculp


----------



## David Cuny

I have the following mapped to Expression:

Vibrato depth (not rate)
Bow Pressure
Bow Position


----------



## lettucehat

That's a lot! Do you scale the two bow parameters at all? I hadn't thought of this.


----------



## muziksculp

David Cuny said:


> I have the following mapped to Expression:
> 
> Vibrato depth (not rate)
> Bow Pressure
> Bow Position



I'm a bit fuzzy on what you wrote, so.. you have three parameter CC's controlled by Expression CC#11) ?

How are you doing that ? Are you using a BC ?

*EDIT :* Oh.. OK, Yes, I think that's possible by just re-mapping the CC's in the instrument's GUI to the same CC# via the CC-Remapping page. I totally forgot about that. So you can have Vibrato Depth, Bow Pressure, and Bow Position all react to CC11 (Expression). I need to try that .

I'm also curious if using a BC is better suited for the long notes (Legato, and Sustains), since one can form them expressively via breath. But on the other hand, when one needs to play short notes, (Detache, Staccato, ..etc) the BC is not ideal for this. So, I would switch back to Keyboard control. Do you find this to be true when using a BC ? or ... ? 

Thanks.


----------



## David Cuny

Yes, I'm using a breath wind controller. I play it live, so expressiveness is more important to me than authenticity.

For short notes, I just blow a short, hard puff into the breath wind controller. Good enough for me, but I'm typically just trying to get an expressive performance of a melody, and not a specific bowing from a score.

I should also note that I've fiddled with the parameter sliders until the instrument responded the way I liked. It's unlikely you'd pick the values I did.

*Edit:* Actually, I should have mentioned I play a wind controller. I'm not a particularly _skilled_ player, but I used to play recorder and a bit of flute, so the fingering was pretty natural. I've had a breath controller on my "to get" list for a while now, but it always seems to get bumped down to the bottom of the list.

I also sing (some disagree with the use of that term ), so I find using breath to control the instrument natural.

Some have said that playing a breath controller makes the emulated string instruments sound more like a woodwind, but unless those people feel like buying me a Roli or a Touché controller, I'm sticking with an EWI.

Some keyboard players prefer to use the mod wheel as their expression controller. If I were a decent keyboard player, I might think the same. But I find the breath controller pretty intuitive.


----------



## Windbag

For other modeled (AM) strings, I've found that expression and bow pressure are good to have related but not necessarily hard linked, and thus have them on breath pressure and bite pressure, respectively. 

Bow position is somewhat independent of these and I'll put that on ether an expression pedal or joystick (my SL88 has sticks in place of wheels). The pedal is nice as it keeps both my hands free for keys

I'm expecting to wind up at a similar setup for SM's strings. And David you should jump on the TEControl. from a EWI owner....trust me.


----------



## David Cuny

Windbag said:


> And David you should jump on the TEControl. from a EWI owner....trust me.


Oh, I'll get it for sure. And then kick myself for waiting so long!


----------



## lychee

David Cuny said:


> I have the following mapped to Expression:
> 
> Vibrato depth (not rate)
> Bow Pressure
> Bow Position


Are you sure you are talking about SM S&ES?
Because I have never seen CCs regarding the pressure of the bow and its position in the interface
(except for the position, but in keyswitch).
If these settings exist, that might explain why I can't get this plugin to sound.


----------



## robgb

lychee said:


> Are you sure you are talking about SM S&ES?
> Because I have never seen CCs regarding the pressure of the bow and its position in the interface
> (except for the position, but in keyswitch).
> If these settings exist, that might explain why I can't get this plugin to sound.


I believe he's talking about Audio Modeling.


----------



## lychee

robgb said:


> I believe he's talking about Audio Modeling.



Ah ok, if that's it, I apologize for having played my part and not having picked up the thread of the conversation.

But David Cuny on the layout of your build I would rather recommend the position of the bow in relation to the notes of the keyboard (at 50%) rather than with the expression CC if Swam allows it.
I have Reason Friktion which has a lot of similarities with the Swam Strings, I configured it like that and since then it is day and night in terms of sound.


----------



## muziksculp

robgb said:


> I believe he's talking about Audio Modeling.



Hmmm... Maybe he got confused, my question was regarding SM Solo & Ens. Strings.

The more I discover, learn, and practice using this library, the more I'm impressed by it. It surely is not a plug and play library, it requires a good amount of time to get nicely acquainted with these instruments, so a good doze of patience is a must.

These instruments are so capable, yet deep, and require a lot of experimentation to get the sound you are seeking in your head. i.e. Each instruments has multiple Body Impulse Responses, each with a different character. Almost like having many models of a Cello, Violin, or a new Group of Violinists that have different instruments  So many options, and flexibility ..A traditional Sample Library would not even dream of achieving this type of flexibility.

CC# 100 Controls the Instruments Body Impulses. i.e. The Celli Ensemble CC #100 values will switch between Instrument Body Impulses of (1 sec, 2 sec., 3 sec., 4 sec., 5 sec., Sordino S, Sordino M). that along with the Timbral Shaping, Proximity settings, ..etc. The possibilities are endless to get the sound one wants to hear), again this is impossible to achieve with a traditional sample library.

Using the right Reverb Combo, and settings, plus EQ, are the other variables in getting the timbre, or sound you want. Plus tweaking the Virtual Soundstage.

As far as real time performance, I find using a BC for the slow, legato lines a good choice, but for the more agile, faster, short articulation phrases, I prefer using the Keyboard velocity for the dynamics.

Another interesting, and useful feature is the CC# Remapping options, which make it a very flexible system to work with, but in addition to being able to assign any CC # you desire for any specific parameter, you could also assign the same CC# to multiple parameters, so that same CC# can control more than one parameter simultaneously.

My BC can transmit three CC values simultaneously, not that many Controllers can do that, and I can scale each one of them differently, so the possibilities are endless. Lots of experimenting is what I'm doing with these instruments, it has been a very interesting, and rewarding sonic experience so far.

I also find setting the Expression, and Velocity Mapping curves quite important to get good results when performing the instruments in real time.


----------



## David Cuny

Yep, I'm probably the most confused one on this thread! 

Apologies!


----------



## muziksculp

David Cuny said:


> Yep, I'm probably the most confused one on this thread!
> 
> Apologies!



No problem, actually your reply earlier made me think a little outside the box as far as assigning multiple parameters to the same CC#. in SM-Solo & Ens. Strings. Which didn't cross my mind before your post.


----------



## river angler

Does anyone know if one can one assign key velocity to control dynamics in this library? (volume and timbre dynamics)


----------



## muziksculp

river angler said:


> Does anyone know if one can one assign key velocity to control dynamics in this library? (volume and timbre dynamics)


----------



## river angler

muziksculp said:


>


Thanks for the screenshot!... I have looked at the manual and must have missed this! 

Does this work for the solo instruments as well?... 

I rarely use the mod wheel to control dynamics preferring the initial strike of the keys to donate the brightness/volume of the timbre. Also live on stage when both hands are occupied playing chords the mod wheel is obviously impractical!


----------



## river angler

I just found the relevant info in the manual:

_CC25: allows to control the initial dynamics by the interplay between note-on velocity and current CC11. If set to 127 (default) it automatically creates a dynamics ramp starting from the value of note-on velocity and ending at the current CC11. This allows automatic crescendo-sforzato effects, often too difficult to create with the expression pedal. BC and WC players may prefer to directly shape their attacks. In this case CC25 may be set to 0._

I am still a little confused by this as to wether it allows complete control of initial dynamics via note-on velocity only?


----------



## philippe goi

new sound exploration with the beginning of the American quartet of A.Dvorak
View attachment AMERICAN QUATUOR A.DVORAK SampleModeling STRINGS.mp4


----------



## mhecker

Wow, wow, wow!


----------



## PerryD

I have a LOT of string libraries but for lyrical stuff I don't have a better alternative over S&ES. Even in this little fluff piece, it's just cool to _play_ what I want without keyswitches.


----------



## muziksculp

PerryD said:


> I have a LOT of string libraries but for lyrical stuff I don't have a better alternative over S&ES. Even in this little fluff piece, it's just cool to _play_ what I want without keyswitches.




Wonderful Lyrical track. 

Q. Did you mix any of the SampleModeling Solo Strings in this track, or is it only the ensembles ? 

Thanks.


----------



## PerryD

muziksculp said:


> Wonderful Lyrical track.
> 
> Q. Did you mix any of the SampleModeling Solo Strings in this track, or is it only the ensembles ?
> 
> Thanks.


 They are just the ensembles. I layered violin ensembles 1 & 2 for a more lush sound and I almost completely turned down the bow noise to avoid harshness.


----------



## timbit2006

Does anyone have any examples of an ensemble made up of individual solo players vs the premade ensemble? I'll probably have time to experiment in the next few weeks but might as well ask here.


----------



## I like music

timbit2006 said:


> Does anyone have any examples of an ensemble made up of individual solo players vs the premade ensemble? I'll probably have time to experiment in the next few weeks but might as well ask here.



Haven't tried this, but I did try creating 3 'divisi' sections by making the section sizes as small as possible. I believe the estimate was that with CC 95 at its lowest value, the section size is supposed to emulate around 5 violins.

So then I changed up all the performance-affecting CCs a little, to give variety to each divisi section, and proceeded to layer them, to create a bigger sound from the smaller ones. I _think_ liked it, even though I bet people would spot phasing issues etc.

I did consider doing what you've suggested, but then I realised that I'm not a psychopath. I was sure that someone crazy would come along and try it! Keen to hear your results!


----------



## muziksculp

PerryD said:


> They are just the ensembles. I layered violin ensembles 1 & 2 for a more lush sound and I almost completely turned down the bow noise to avoid harshness.



Hi @PerryD ,

Thanks for the helpful feedback. 

Have you used/experimented with the SM Solo Cello ? What are your thoughts about it ?


----------



## PerryD

muziksculp said:


> Hi @PerryD ,
> 
> Thanks for the helpful feedback.
> 
> Have you used/experimented with the SM Solo Cello ? What are your thoughts about it ?


 I have only really used the solo instruments in a quartet. I'll have to see if I can find one. Here's another lyrical example I did for a church voice-over.


----------



## muziksculp

PerryD said:


> I have only really used the solo instruments in a quartet. I'll have to see if I can find one. Here's another lyrical example I did for a church voice-over.




You used mostly legato style writing in the demo.

But, what do you think of the Solo Cello in a multi-articulation, more exposed, i.e. with just a piano/harpsichord accompaniment ? That's imho. a better way to evaluate it. With the Solo Cello playing all sorts of shorts, longs, portamentos, ..etc.

I'm also curious, what do you think about the Timbre quality of the Solo Cello ?


----------



## PerryD

muziksculp said:


> You used mostly legato style writing in the demo.
> 
> But, what do you think of the Solo Cello in a multi-articulation, more exposed, i.e. with just a piano/harpsichord accompaniment ? That's imho. a better way to evaluate it.


True! I was just sharing what I have found to be it's real strength. There really is nothing else that I have that plays this way.


----------



## muziksculp

PerryD said:


> True! I was just sharing what I have found to be it's real strength. There really is nothing else that I have that plays this way.



Yes, I agree. Thanks. 

What do you think about the Timbre of the Solo Cello ? and the other Strings in general ?

I personally would like to see SM improve the overall timbre of the entire library.


----------



## PerryD

Another way I am using them is in poly mode for a sort of "pad strings" thing. I wanted to do something quickly to test a new (real) flugelhorn I picked up. I just haven't heard any examples of people using S&ES that way...maybe a good thing! Probably enough of my stuff at least for now.


----------



## muziksculp

PerryD said:


> Another way I am using them is in poly mode for a sort of "pad strings" thing. I wanted to do something quickly to test a new (real) flugelhorn I picked up. I just haven't heard any examples of people using S&ES that way...maybe a good thing! Probably enough of my stuff at least for now.




Interesting. I never tried using the SM Solo Instruments in Polymode to play chords. I have no idea why I didn't try this, now I will.  

That's a very nice sounding Flugelhorn. 

Thanks.


----------



## PerryD

muziksculp said:


> Interesting. I never tried using the SM Solo Instruments in Polymode to play chords. I have no idea why I didn't try this, now I will.
> 
> That's a very nice sounding Flugelhorn.
> 
> Thanks.


 Thanks! It's a 20+ year old Kanstul copper bell flugel. Really a nice, dark sound.


----------



## Bollen

muziksculp said:


> That's a very nice sounding Flugelhorn.


Agreed! Very tastefully played...💕


----------



## muziksculp

Hi,

What do you think about the *SM **Solo Cello*'s Timbre ? 

Anyone able to make it sound very realistic ? 

I have been tinkering around with the Timbral Shaping features, but still struggling to get the timbre to sound realistic. It's a hit and miss kind of thing so far. This is the area that I would love to see Sample Modeling improve, basically the timbre. 

If you have achieved a very good/realistic Solo Cello timbre, I would love to hear it. 

Thanks,
Muziksculp


----------



## I like music

muziksculp said:


> Hi,
> 
> What do you think about the *SM **Solo Cello*'s Timbre ?
> 
> Anyone able to make it sound very realistic ?
> 
> I have been tinkering around with the Timbral Shaping features, but still struggling to get the timbre to sound realistic. It's a hit and miss kind of thing so far. This is the area that I would love to see Sample Modeling improve, basically the timbre.
> 
> If you have achieved a very good/realistic Solo Cello timbre, I would love to hear it.
> 
> Thanks,
> Muziksculp


Haven't tried it much so cannot comment. It's the ensemble celli that I have the same question about! I wonder if our queries are somehow related.


----------



## muziksculp

I like music said:


> Haven't tried it much so cannot comment. It's the ensemble celli that I have the same question about! I wonder if our queries are somehow related.



If you have some time, give the Solo Cello a try, and see if you can get a good/realistic timbre when playing it. I'm still not very satisfied with the results I'm getting. That's why I posted about this. 

I will spend some time testing the Celli Ensemble, and see how their timbre is.


----------



## I like music

muziksculp said:


> If you have some time, give the Solo Cello a try, and see if you can get a good/realistic timbre when playing it. I'm still not very satisfied with the results I'm getting. That's why I posted about this.
> 
> I will spend some time testing the Celli Ensemble, and see how their timbre is.


Will try it this week! I was comparing the ensembles with other libraries I have, and there was a metallic/colder sound that didn't have as much body as the other libraries. Control is of course superb but timbre meant I stopped using them. Not to say they are bad, but there's something in the higher registers that seems to be a bit lighter than I liked. Perhaps it is my bad usage of reverb which is causing this.


----------



## muziksculp

If Sample Modeling can considerably improve the timbre of this library, it will be my go to strings library, the timbre is the main reason I'm not using them much. 

imho. they lack the body and richness that sampled libraries offer, I don't have a clue if this can be improved by SM, but if it is not possible, this would be very sad, since the playability is very good.


----------



## chapbot

muziksculp said:


> If Sample Modeling can considerably improve the timbre of this library, it will be my go to strings library, the timbre is the main reason I'm not using them much.
> 
> imho. they lack the body and richness that sampled libraries offer, I don't have a clue if this can be improved by SM, but if it is not possible, this would be very sad, since the playability is very good.


Translation: This would be my main strings library but it doesn't sound that great.


----------



## muziksculp

chapbot said:


> Translation: This would be my main strings library but it doesn't sound that great.


Thanks for the translation  

I would like to hear more feedback form user of Sample Modeling Solo & Ens. Strings especially about this important detail, the lack of rich-full timbre, would you use it much more if it had a much richer-fuller, more realistic timbre ? or are you content with it as is ?


----------



## muziksculp

Funny, I was working with the SM Solo Cello in my Studio, trying to improve its timbre, and playing various random phrases, my wife walks in, and sits next to me for a few minutes, I ask her what do you think of the sound of this Solo Cello ? 

She answers, Oh.. I didn't know you were playing a solo cello, it sounded like something else.  

I think that's one way to find out if it is good enough as is.


----------



## Woodie1972

muziksculp said:


> If Sample Modeling can considerably improve the timbre of this library, it will be my go to strings library, the timbre is the main reason I'm not using them much.
> 
> imho. they lack the body and richness that sampled libraries offer, I don't have a clue if this can be improved by SM, but if it is not possible, this would be very sad, since the playability is very good.


I don't have the library, but from my experience with the Aaron Venture brass and woodwinds a lot can be improved with some EQ, by emphasizing the low end a bit and drop some of the high frequencies. But maybe you mean something completely different?


----------



## muziksculp

Woodie1972 said:


> I don't have the library, but from my experience with the Aaron Venture brass and woodwinds a lot can be improved with some EQ, by emphasizing the low end a bit and drop some of the high frequencies. But maybe you mean something completely different?



The timbre of Sample Modeling Solo & Ens. Strings is not going to get much better via EQing them.

The core sound needs to be richer, fuller, you can't add that by boosting frequencies that are not present in the first place.


----------



## Woodie1972

Okay, thanks for clarifying.


----------



## DSmolken

muziksculp said:


> The core sound needs to be richer, fuller, you can't add that by boosting frequencies that are not present in the first place.


Yes we can! Obviously only to a degree, but plop tape and vinyl emulation on it, followed by a digital harmonic exciter. You won't get a rich natural orchestral tone, but will get frequencies that weren't originally there, and might be able to get the "1950s record sampled in modern hip-hop" sound. But you might be able to get some small way towards what you want by sticking some saturation or exciter before the EQ.


----------



## muziksculp

DSmolken said:


> Yes we can! Obviously only to a degree, but plop tape and vinyl emulation on it, followed by a digital harmonic exciter. You won't get a rich natural orchestral tone, but will get frequencies that weren't originally there, and might be able to get the "1950s record sampled in modern hip-hop" sound. But you might be able to get some small way towards what you want by sticking some saturation or exciter before the EQ.


Hehe.. That's a lot of Doctoring, or let's say Plastic Surgery, which often looks/sounds fake


----------



## DSmolken

Yeah, it'd probably only work for styles which don't need a natural sound, but I'd still give it a shot just to see what happens.


----------



## muziksculp

I'm very curious to know if it is too difficult for Sample Modeling to improve the overall Timbre of the Strings in this library, both ensemble, and solo ? 

Have they hit a dead-end as far as the timbre is concerned, meaning we shouldn't expect any further timbre improvements via future updates ?


----------



## chapbot

muziksculp said:


> Thanks for the translation
> 
> I would like to hear more feedback form user of Sample Modeling Solo & Ens. Strings especially about this important detail, the lack of rich-full timbre, would you use it much more if it had a much richer-fuller, more realistic timbre ? or are you content with it as is ?


I got it, I think, the first day it came out. I would never use it by itself but found that it does blend nicely. I used it in a few tracks but abandoned it in favor of other libraries. Never used the solo strings at all. I had hoped it would match the quality of their solo trumpet and trombone which I think are the best on the market, but it isn't quite there yet.


----------



## muziksculp

chapbot said:


> I got it, I think, the first day it came out. I would never use it by itself but found that it does blend nicely. I used it in a few tracks but abandoned it in favor of other libraries. Never used the solo strings at all. I had hoped it would match the quality of their solo trumpet and trombone which I think are the best on the market, but it isn't quite there yet.


hi @chapbot ,

Thanks for the feedback. 

Yes, I'm not surprised you are not using them much. I also agree that their Solo Brass is so much better sounding than their Strings as far as timbre is concerned. 

This is why I'm really hoping that SM can considerably improve the timbre of their Strings, both solo and ensemble in the future.


----------



## chapbot

muziksculp said:


> hi @chapbot ,
> 
> Thanks for the feedback.
> 
> Yes, I'm not surprised you are not using them much. I also agree that their Solo Brass is so much better sounding than their Strings as far as timbre is concerned.
> 
> This is why I'm really hoping that SM can considerably improve the timbre of their Strings, both solo and ensemble in the future.


Well, I haven't given up yet... they've been at this a long time and have been incrementally improving the library so here's hoping!


----------



## muziksculp

chapbot said:


> Well, I haven't given up yet... they've been at this a long time and have been incrementally improving the library so here's hoping!



Same here. I like their technology, and approach. But they are not there yet, lots of improvements are still needed. 

Actually, I might just email SM to see what they say about this important detail.


----------



## chapbot

muziksculp said:


> Same here. I like their technology, and approach. But they are not there yet, lots of improvements are still needed.
> 
> Actually, I might just email SM to see what they say about this important detail.


Please report back if you hear anything!


----------



## Vardaro

Well, I find the _whole_ library sounds just like the kind of strings I like to listen to, or play myself on a good day! Warm, refined, expressive, dynamic...


----------



## muziksculp

Vardaro said:


> Well, I find the _whole_ library sounds just like the kind of strings I like to listen to, or play myself on a good day! Warm, refined, expressive, dynamic...



Hmmm.. Maybe you have a Special Edition of the library that has a wonderful rich, full timbre out of the box, because my version doesn't seem to give me that kind of sonic satisfaction. Maybe I just need to keep hammering at it until I hear something special. Plus, I'm not alone expressing this.


----------



## Tanuj Tiku

I just got Audiomodeling solo strings and though they are not yet ultra realistic, they are useful for many situations. 

I can imagine that Sample modeling can do some good stuff too. I think the trouble sometimes with these discussions is that there is a huge pressure on modeled instruments to sound amazing. I think they have many problems, like many libraries but are incredibly useful in the right situation. 

It does take a lot of work though and sometimes, it's just not worth it. It is a fantastic writing tool though and a great addition to any professional's toolkit. 

Here is a snippet from Memoirs of a Geisha I just did quickly (Audio modeling cello):









Sayuri's Theme.wav


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## muziksculp

Tanuj Tiku said:


> I just got Audiomodeling solo strings and though they are not yet ultra realistic, they are useful for many situations.
> 
> I can imagine that Sample modeling can do some good stuff too. I think the trouble sometimes with these discussions is that there is a huge pressure on modeled instruments to sound amazing. I think they have many problems, like many libraries but are incredibly useful in the right situation.
> 
> It does take a lot of work though and sometimes, it's just not worth it. It is a fantastic writing tool though and a great addition to any professional's toolkit.
> 
> Here is a snippet from Memoirs of a Geisha I just did quickly (Audio modeling cello):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sayuri's Theme.wav
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Hi @Tanuj Tiku ,

Thanks for sharing your wonderful sounding demo using Audio Modeling's Cello. That's one of my favorite JW scores.

Yes, these physically modeled instruments have some great moments where they show how they can shine. But in general they are not easy to use, lots of practice, and experimenting is needed to get them to do what is needed, and sometimes they just can't do what one wants to hear.

Their Timbre is one of the areas that I feel need improvements. Especially Solo Instruments.

Actually, I like the timbre of the Audio Modeling Cello more than the Sample Modeling Cello.

Do you also have Sample Modeling Strings ? 

Cheers,
Muziksculp


----------



## william81723

Tanuj Tiku said:


> I just got Audiomodeling solo strings and though they are not yet ultra realistic, they are useful for many situations.
> 
> I can imagine that Sample modeling can do some good stuff too. I think the trouble sometimes with these discussions is that there is a huge pressure on modeled instruments to sound amazing. I think they have many problems, like many libraries but are incredibly useful in the right situation.
> 
> It does take a lot of work though and sometimes, it's just not worth it. It is a fantastic writing tool though and a great addition to any professional's toolkit.
> 
> Here is a snippet from Memoirs of a Geisha I just did quickly (Audio modeling cello):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sayuri's Theme.wav
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Can I ask for your setting's screenshot?
I tried so hard but didn't get a good result like your demo.
Thanks!!!


----------



## Vardaro

Perhaps I'm just stupid to want a library to sound like a good recording of the real thing?

I've spent my life playing, and surrounded by, live strings!


----------



## Tanuj Tiku

william81723 said:


> Can I ask for your setting's screenshot?
> I tried so hard but didn't get a good result like your demo.
> Thanks!!!


For now here is a FB post. All I can say is that there is a ton of automation with AM as well as with the audio.

I am not in the studio at the moment but will post all the details tomorrow or day after.


----------



## Tanuj Tiku

Vardaro said:


> Perhaps I'm just stupid to want a library to sound like a good recording of the real thing?
> 
> I've spent my life playing, and surrounded by, live strings!


You are missing the point slightly with these tools. It’s good for different situations and offers something that others don’t. Nobody claims that it sounds exactly like the real thing. 

its a fantastic writing tool!


----------



## Tanuj Tiku

muziksculp said:


> Hi @Tanuj Tiku ,
> 
> Thanks for sharing your wonderful sounding demo using Audio Modeling's Cello. That's one of my favorite JW scores.
> 
> Yes, these physically modeled instruments have some great moments where they show how they can shine. But in general they are not easy to use, lots of practice, and experimenting is needed to get them to do what is needed, and sometimes they just can't do what one wants to hear.
> 
> Their Timbre is one of the areas that I feel need improvements. Especially Solo Instruments.
> 
> Actually, I like the timbre of the Audio Modeling Cello more than the Sample Modeling Cello.
> 
> Do you also have Sample Modeling Strings ?
> 
> Cheers,
> Muziksculp





muziksculp said:


> Hi @Tanuj Tiku ,
> 
> Thanks for sharing your wonderful sounding demo using Audio Modeling's Cello. That's one of my favorite JW scores.
> 
> Yes, these physically modeled instruments have some great moments where they show how they can shine. But in general they are not easy to use, lots of practice, and experimenting is needed to get them to do what is needed, and sometimes they just can't do what one wants to hear.
> 
> Their Timbre is one of the areas that I feel need improvements. Especially Solo Instruments.
> 
> Actually, I like the timbre of the Audio Modeling Cello more than the Sample Modeling Cello.
> 
> Do you also have Sample Modeling Strings ?
> 
> Cheers,
> Muziksculp


I don’t currently own SM strings (I do have their brass).

may be the Modeling will improve in the future. They are all great tools that can be deployed for the right situation.

Here is another thing I did sometime ago with AM woodwinds. They are not ultra-realistic but it does what others cannot!


----------



## william81723

Tanuj Tiku said:


> For now here is a FB post. All I can say is that there is a ton of automation with AM as well as with the audio.
> 
> I am not in the studio at the moment but will post all the details tomorrow or day after.



Thanks for sharing. You are excellent.


----------



## Vardaro

muziksculp said:


> I personally would like to see SM improve the overall timbre of the entire library.


I don't hear how one can "improve" the _timbre_ of this library. If we are not satisfied with the sound of well-recorded real strings, it's surely up to us to hype them up to meet our imagined version of the instruments.

To my experienced ears  they sound like the "real thing" heard at a recital rather than "under the ear". Ideal for e.g. classical mockups..


----------



## DSmolken

Aren't these deconvolved and reconvolved samples, which is a new process? That might have room for optimization and improvement.


----------



## Vardaro

We are promised more ER IRs in the future (p.22 of the manual).
There is also "timbral shaping" of harmonics (not envelope EQ, which Kontakt can take care of).
I still resent the word "improve". How about "expand".


----------



## muziksculp

Vardaro said:


> We are promised more ER IRs in the future (p.22 of the manual).
> There is also "timbral shaping" of harmonics (not envelope EQ, which Kontakt can take care of).
> I still resent the word "improve". How about "expand".


Hi @Vardaro,

OK.. To use a terminology that suits your taste, I will say... I'm hoping that Sample Modeling can expand on what Solo & Ens. Strings can offer so far, by offering more options of timbre design, be that via new timbral shaping system, or IR options, or updating the core Samples used for the Strings in this library, or .. anything else they can do that can make it even more flexible. 

But, honestly, I see no reason for you to get resentful if I had used the word 'Improve' , there is always room for improvement, and there is nothing wrong if they can improve the library, it's surely not perfect. Non of the String libraries available today are perfect. 

Cheers,
Muziksculp


----------



## muziksculp

Hi,

I have been spending some time, experimenting with the SM Solo & Ens Strings. using the *Cello Ensemble (Dry) version* , I decided to try using the dry-version of the library, and see if I can get a nice timber from using my reverbs, and other dsp treatments, plus customizing the patch to taste via timbral shaping, and other parameters. Since I was always using the Wet versions, So far the results I'm getting are quite good. I still need to do more work, but there is some progress sonically that I'm liking. 

I also decided to test layering the *Solo-Cello* with *Cello Ensemble* , and tweak the balance of the two Patches to taste. Also applying some reverb/s to the Solo Cello. and the results are pretty good, actually this is imho. a very good way to get richer, and fuller sounding Cello Ensemble sound from this library. 

For the Cello-Ensemble I used the (4 Secs.) version of the supplied Instrument IR convolution option. Which I found sounded just right, with the Timbral Shaping curves I selected, and the amounts they are applied. This is the more complex, and time consuming part of making these instruments play to ones taste. Especially, since you have to click on the Synchronize button to hear the results as they should sound once you edit a timbral shaping parameter, since you don't hear the edited effect instantly when changing it. 

Next, I will try using this same formula for the other Sections, and then try to see how I can improve the Solo Instrument's Timbre. So, I have lots more experimenting to do with this library, but it seems to be what needs to be done, to get the results to my taste. I haven't tried experimenting with applying EQ, but that another detail I will be testing soon. 

If you have any tips for using SM Solo & Ens. Strings, please post them on this thread. (Thanks). 

Cheers,
Muziksculp


----------



## Vardaro

I presume/hope that we can save these adjustments/improvements as multis etc.

I guess that in the studio the extra depth/warmth you want would be a mixture of proximity effect and early & late reflections?


----------



## DANIELE

muziksculp said:


> Hi,
> 
> I have been spending some time, experimenting with the SM Solo & Ens Strings. using the *Cello Ensemble (Dry) version* , I decided to try using the dry-version of the library, and see if I can get a nice timber from using my reverbs, and other dsp treatments, plus customizing the patch to taste via timbral shaping, and other parameters. Since I was always using the Wet versions, So far the results I'm getting are quite good. I still need to do more work, but there is some progress sonically that I'm liking.
> 
> I also decided to test layering the *Solo-Cello* with *Cello Ensemble* , and tweak the balance of the two Patches to taste. Also applying some reverb/s to the Solo Cello. and the results are pretty good, actually this is imho. a very good way to get richer, and fuller sounding Cello Ensemble sound from this library.
> 
> For the Cello-Ensemble I used the (4 Secs.) version of the supplied Instrument IR convolution option. Which I found sounded just right, with the Timbral Shaping curves I selected, and the amounts they are applied. This is the more complex, and time consuming part of making these instruments play to ones taste. Especially, since you have to click on the Synchronize button to hear the results as they should sound once you edit a timbral shaping parameter, since you don't hear the edited effect instantly when changing it.
> 
> Next, I will try using this same formula for the other Sections, and then try to see how I can improve the Solo Instrument's Timbre. So, I have lots more experimenting to do with this library, but it seems to be what needs to be done, to get the results to my taste. I haven't tried experimenting with applying EQ, but that another detail I will be testing soon.
> 
> If you have any tips for using SM Solo & Ens. Strings, please post them on this thread. (Thanks).
> 
> Cheers,
> Muziksculp


I found a very good balance with my strings but I'm still working on it.

I'm also using the dry multis and in the first place I set all the Virtual Space knobs to 0 (with the exception of the Width one), then I found out that using all the knobs, especially the Distance one, take me to a better result in combination with my virtual space and reverb. It is more balanced with the rest of the orchestra.

Try to play with that knobs too, SM Strings offer a huge amount of settings.


What it concerns me is that I still having hanging notes when I use tremolo sometimes.


----------



## Vardaro

Bear in mind that the Timbral Shaping modifies the balance of overtones of each individual pitch (like changing to a different make of strings, or playing nearer the bridge), while EQ will modify the body formants and ERs through which the notes and their overtones pass.
I suspect that @muziksculp will get most benefit from the latter?

(I shan't be trying this yet, since I am quite satisfied with the timbre as it is  )


----------



## Bollen

So I've finally joined the club! My business partner got if for me as a gift yesterday... Had a quick play around and then came straight here for references on what's dodgy about it.

I have to say I am quite impressed by it so far! I found I could do lyrical stuff much quicker and realistic than any other library I own (and I have too many). The default cello was disappointing, but then found that cello 3 was very nice, 7 is not bad either. Loved how I could get a very nice sounding divisi by simply turning the ensemble size down from large to medium. However, I would prefer individual control of desks for more realistic performance and some cool contemporary effects e.g. clusters, textures, separate articulations, etc.

I have to play around with it a bit more, because I'm still not sure how to get a good spiccato, sforzando, etc. I've played around with the attack knob without much success (I was really hoping for some bow pressure control) and how to get realistic super fast arpeggios, which is a different type of legato.


----------



## muziksculp

Hi,

Anyone able to get a very nice sounding, edgy type staccato articulation happening with the Ensembles ? i.e. First Violins ? 

If Yes, any tips on how to do this would be very helpful, and appreciated. maybe a short audio demo/video would be very cool as well. 

Thanks,
Muziksculp


----------



## DANIELE

About the staccato/spiccato sound I posted a comparative between 1.1 and 1.2b some time ago, the new spread they added to the library caused to the shorts to be a little bit less sharp than before even if you follow all the instruction so I'm actually using 1.1 for short notes (or measured tremolo) and 1.2b for the other articulations.

If I don't need sharp staccato notes I use 1.2b for everything.


----------



## muziksculp

DANIELE said:


> About the staccato/spiccato sound I posted a comparative between 1.1 and 1.2b some time ago, the new spread they added to the library caused to the shorts to be a little bit less sharp than before even if you follow all the instruction so I'm actually using 1.1 for short notes (or measured tremolo) and 1.2b for the other articulations.
> 
> If I don't need sharp staccato notes I use 1.2b for everything.


Hi @DANIELE,

Interesting, so the spread they added in ver. 1.2 which I guess gives the ensemble a bit more body, or makes them sound more like an ensemble, takes away from the sharpness of the shorts. Not ideal to have some compromised articulation on the expense of another. Maybe they can improve the attacks in the future to be more sharp again. Although I have been experimenting with EQ, and other DSP treatments to see if that helps in ver. 1.2. With mixed results so far. 

I don't have version 1.1, do you know how I can get it ? 

Thanks,
Muziksculp


----------



## DANIELE

muziksculp said:


> Hi @DANIELE,
> 
> Interesting, so the spread they added in ver. 1.2 which I guess gives the ensemble a bit more body, or makes them sound more like an ensemble, takes away from the sharpness of the shorts. Not ideal to have some compromised articulation on the expense of another. Maybe they can improve the attacks in the future to be more sharp again. Although I have been experimenting with EQ, and other DSP treatments to see if that helps in ver. 1.2. With mixed results so far.
> 
> I don't have version 1.1, do you know how I can get it ?
> 
> Thanks,
> Muziksculp


They tried to mantain both the things and they give some advices in the manual about how to get a better staccato but I tried everything and even if the result is good it isn't enough for me.
I have the library from the beginning, this is why I have 1.1. Try to ask to the developers if they can send it to you.

If I remember correctly both 1.1 and 1.2 shares the same samples so you should only need the new instruments, I have both of them in the same folder.


----------



## muziksculp

Hi,

I have been experimenting with Sample Modeling Ensemble & Solo Strings trying to get them to sound more to my taste, with not much success. But.. today I was thinking a bit outside the box, and I thought, why not use two instances of the Violins 1 Ensembles, layer them and see what I get.

I was thinking this will give me a fuller, thicker sound, and possibly a richer timbre as well. I can change some of the characteristics of each instance, and mix them to taste, one will provide more of the more drier/closer sound, and the other for the more ambience sound. 

I began the adventure, and I can say that I'm quite satisfied with the results so far, I can also perfect the sound via EQ, and other DSP treatments, but I haven't done that yet. Initially I thought I might get phase issues, but so far I'm not hearing any issues. I have both String Ens. 1 instances using the 4 second version Instrument Impulse setting, but I might experiment with changing one of them to another setting, I also have not done much tweaking to the Timbral Shaping of either instances. So, there is a lot of room for further experimenting, and maybe I will even get better results.

I also thought, why not add an Instance of the Solo Violin to the two Instances of the Violin 1 Ensembles, I did some testing, but I didn't see that needed, the two instances of Violin 1 Ensembles did a good job. So, I removed the Solo Violin.

There are a lot more small edits I did to both of the Violin 1 Ensemble instances, so if you feel like trying this, I recommend diving into some detailed editing to get the combo to sound like you want.

By the way I'm achiving a more pronounced attack sound using the two instances of the Violin 1 Ensembles, that I wasn't able to achieve when only using one instance. So that was another nice outcome of my latest experimentation with this library.

I hope this is helpful for users of this library.

Cheers,
Muziksculp


----------



## shawnsingh

OK so I've spent a bit of time tweaking solo cello tone and I think I found something usable. Here's what I figured out:

*EQ shaping vs Timbral shaping:* the timbral shaping feature seems to be relative to the fundamental frequency of the note being played, while EQ shaping is absolute regardless of the note. OK, i'm sure that was obvious, but it's interesting to think about what it means: EQ is a good way to sculpt the body resonance of the instrument (kind of like a cheapskate's IR) and it's also good for emulating any other effects that happen after of the instrument generates sound, like mic distance or acoustic space, while timbral shaping is better for imagining tweaking how the bow scratches the strings to vibrate.

For me, the most frustrating thing was the metallic sound of the cellos. So first thing I tried was to reduce EQ around 4-7 kHz, but I found that sounded OK on some registers of the cello, but odd on other registers. So this was a clue that the metallic sound is more suited to be fixed by timbral shaping...

At first glance timbral shaping did not seem up to the task - the harmonics that cause that metallic sound are beyond the tenth harmonic, and timbral shaping only allows to adjust the first ten harmonics. But there is an indirect way to shape those higher harmonics as a group - by increasing or decreasing all the lower 10 harmonics in the opposite direction. This worked as I expected - if you increase all harmonics to +6, the metallic sound goes away (though, still needs some further adjustment for timbre taste)

Additionally, I found it useful to reduce the second harmonic significantly, and the fourth harmonic half way, and the ninth and tenth harmonics taper off a bit, too. The key however is to keep all of them positive in one group, based on the rules of how the timbral shaping feature works, so that you can still effectively reduce the higher harmonics relative to the fundamental. Screenshot attached.

After that, tweaking became much easier, and here are settings I preferred:
- started with dry cello v1.1
- I liked IR 1s, but 2s / 4s sounded similar and not bad either.
- timbral shaping harmonic formant shift turned all the way down to zero. All the timbral shaping group gains, set to default CC value 64 (i.e. no increase or decrease gain on any group)
- set up timbral shaping harmonics according to screenshot attached.
- all the above made a very decent dry sound to my ear. After that, added reverb + distance sculpting EQ to taste.





Timbral shaping harmonics - note that all of them are positive, necessary to reduce harmonics above 10th relative to these 10 harmonics. significantly lower second and fourth harmonic sounded better to my taste, at least with IR 1s.

To be honest, this was only a fun ear training and technical exercise so far. I haven't actually embraced the workflow to use SM strings yet (nor AM strings either) But now I got it sounding OK to my taste, maybe I should give it a more serious try =)

Hope this is helpful! I'd be interested if this setup gives people more of a better cello tone they were hoping for, or if there are even more improvements on top of this we should try.


----------



## shawnsingh

attached example of cello sound from my previous post.


----------



## muziksculp

shawnsingh said:


> OK so I've spent a bit of time tweaking solo cello tone and I think I found something usable. Here's what I figured out:
> 
> *EQ shaping vs Timbral shaping:* the timbral shaping feature seems to be relative to the fundamental frequency of the note being played, while EQ shaping is absolute regardless of the note. OK, i'm sure that was obvious, but it's interesting to think about what it means: EQ is a good way to sculpt the body resonance of the instrument (kind of like a cheapskate's IR) and it's also good for emulating any other effects that happen after of the instrument generates sound, like mic distance or acoustic space, while timbral shaping is better for imagining tweaking how the bow scratches the strings to vibrate.
> 
> For me, the most frustrating thing was the metallic sound of the cellos. So first thing I tried was to reduce EQ around 4-7 kHz, but I found that sounded OK on some registers of the cello, but odd on other registers. So this was a clue that the metallic sound is more suited to be fixed by timbral shaping...
> 
> At first glance timbral shaping did not seem up to the task - the harmonics that cause that metallic sound are beyond the tenth harmonic, and timbral shaping only allows to adjust the first ten harmonics. But there is an indirect way to shape those higher harmonics as a group - by increasing or decreasing all the lower 10 harmonics in the opposite direction. This worked as I expected - if you increase all harmonics to +6, the metallic sound goes away (though, still needs some further adjustment for timbre taste)
> 
> Additionally, I found it useful to reduce the second harmonic significantly, and the fourth harmonic half way, and the ninth and tenth harmonics taper off a bit, too. The key however is to keep all of them positive in one group, based on the rules of how the timbral shaping feature works, so that you can still effectively reduce the higher harmonics relative to the fundamental. Screenshot attached.
> 
> After that, tweaking became much easier, and here are settings I preferred:
> - started with dry cello v1.1
> - I liked IR 1s, but 2s / 4s sounded similar and not bad either.
> - timbral shaping harmonic formant shift turned all the way down to zero. All the timbral shaping group gains, set to default CC value 64 (i.e. no increase or decrease gain on any group)
> - set up timbral shaping harmonics according to screenshot attached.
> - all the above made a very decent dry sound to my ear. After that, added reverb + distance sculpting EQ to taste.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timbral shaping harmonics - note that all of them are positive, necessary to reduce harmonics above 10th relative to these 10 harmonics. significantly lower second and fourth harmonic sounded better to my taste, at least with IR 1s.
> 
> To be honest, this was only a fun ear training and technical exercise so far. I haven't actually embraced the workflow to use SM strings yet (nor AM strings either) But now I got it sounding OK to my taste, maybe I should give it a more serious try =)
> 
> Hope this is helpful! I'd be interested if this setup gives people more of a better cello tone they were hoping for, or if there are even more improvements on top of this we should try.


Hi @shawnsingh ,

Thanks for the helpful tip. I will give it a try, and see how I like the sound of the Solo Cello.

Also check my post above you, looks like we both posted our tips around the same time.


----------



## muziksculp

Hi @shawnsingh ,

OK, I gave the Solo Cello a try after performing your edits on the Timbral Shaping.

THANK YOU ... THANK YOU.... And THANK YOU again. 

Wow... this tweak to the Timbral Shaping made a HUGE difference to how the Solo Cello sounds, actually I'm totally impressed with the results I'm hearing, It's like I'm using a new Solo Cello Library ! 
It might be one of the best sounding, and performing Solo cellos I can play now, with minimal or no Key-Switches which is amazing  

Oh... and I'm using ver 1.2 of the library. 

By the way, I also have Audio Modeling Solo Strings, but have not used them much, but will do as soon as they update them to version 3. For now, I'm finding that experimenting, and knowing how to best work with Sample Modeling Solo & Ensemble Strings is paying off big time. I'm also curious if Sample Modeling will be updating this library in the near future. 

Cheers,
Muziksculp


----------



## muziksculp

@shawnsingh ,

OK, so I decided to try using your Timbral Shaping settings for the Solo Cello on the Solo Violin, and I was just smiling when I played it. 

Give it a try  

Cheers,
Muziksculp


----------



## I like music

Shawn's a wizard! I will try these. Might be worth trying on the ensembles since I imagine the modules are constructed from the same basic material as the solo instrument!

@muziksculp I had good results layering two divisi ensembles too!


----------



## Vardaro

Convincing.
I still prefer the original timbre  but I now understand what you both were after.


----------



## muziksculp

I like music said:


> Shawn's a wizard! I will try these. Might be worth trying on the ensembles since I imagine the modules are constructed from the same basic material as the solo instrument!
> 
> @muziksculp I had good results layering two divisi ensembles too!


Yes, he is. 

Believe it or not, I feel I have a brand new version of this library that sounds so much better now. Actually I can't believe what I'm hearing from this library now. It's a real GEM. 

I'm going to try the Timb.Shaping settings with all the Ensembles, and see what happens, I might not need to layer two Violin 1 Ensembles, but I'm glad you like the results of layering two Divisi Ensembles. It surely gives a fuller sound. 

I'm very excited, and happy. 

Thanks again Shawn.


----------



## muziksculp

Vardaro said:


> Convincing.
> I still prefer the original timbre  but I now understand what you both were after.


Not for me, the new timbre sounds much better to my ears, by a million miles.


----------



## shawnsingh

@muziksculp and @I like music thanks for the kind words!

Listening again, I think there is some middle ground between original timbre and the timbre I got... It depends heavily on what reverb and tone-matching anyone wants to have. In any case I think the important part was to knock out that metallic flavor, which can be done by just increasing all 10 harmonics relative to higher harmonics, that part was the key for me.


----------



## Bollen

shawnsingh said:


> attached example of cello sound from my previous post.


Speaking as an amateur cellist, this sounds too damped and dark for my taste, but it's definitely better than the default... IR 3 sounds closer to my cello...


----------



## muziksculp

Bollen said:


> Speaking as an amateur cellist, this sounds too damped and dark for my taste, but it's definitely better than the default... IR 3 sounds closer to my cello...


The great thing about this library, is the flexibility we have in shaping the overall timbre, and the minimal amount of articulations needed compared to traditional Sampled Strings libraries.


----------



## muziksculp

One more piece of Good News, I contacted Sample Modeling Support to ask if they can email me ver. 1.1, I also asked if there is an upcoming update for this library.

Support replied that they are currently working on the next update, so surely this library will only get better, and better with time. Hopefully the next update will not take too long to be released.

After the Timbral Shaping setting suggested by Shawn, I doubt I will benefit much from ver 1.1 , I'm very happy with ver. 1.2


----------



## Bollen

muziksculp said:


> The great thing about this library, is the flexibility we have in shaping the overall timbre, and the minimal amount of articulations needed compared to traditional Sampled Strings libraries.


I know, after barely two days playing with it I'm in love!!!


----------



## muziksculp

Bollen said:


> I know, after barely two days playing with it I'm in love!!!


Yup.. Try using VSL's Solo Violin compared to Sample Modeling Solo Violin. It's like driving a Ford Model-T vs driving a modern luxury sports car.


----------



## shawnsingh

Bollen said:


> Speaking as an amateur cellist, this sounds too damped and dark for my taste, but it's definitely better than the default... IR 3 sounds closer to my cello...



Actually I agree. I had a broad tilt-like eq and reverb after that which added more high frequencies but I disabled those for the example. Experimenting further i think I got a brighter but less metallic tone from the library alone, but then I am finding it hard to add reverb and tone matching...


----------



## Bollen

muziksculp said:


> Yup.. Try using VSL's Solo Violin compared to Sample Modeling Solo Violin. It's like driving a Ford Model-T vs driving a modern luxury sports car.


One of the first things I tried.... However, VSL still has the lead on a few things like sfz, really fast arpeggios, etc. but it pales in comparison...


----------



## muziksculp

Hi,

OK, so after a while of further messing around with the *SM Solo Violin*. I found a few things that made it sound very good to my ears. This includes a new Custom Timbral Shaping setting, also for reverb/acoustics I used a bit of the built-in reverb, plus Exponential Audio's R4 reverb (they are now part of iZotope). Which made it sound very nice, and transparent sounding. I used the Violin 5s IR version. You might like one of the others, that's a matter of taste.

Here are two pics showing the Reverb settings for the Solo Violin, and R4, and another pic showing the Timbral Shaping settings, with the same R4 custom preset.


----------



## DANIELE

Wow, many things happened while I was sleeping. I will try these settings after work.

I already played a lot with timbral shaping but I never find it to be so much useful for my purposes. I never tried to do such thing though. Great work everyone.

I know they'll keep to update the library and I'm sure they will reach very high levels. I hope they'll fix some bug also.

The solo strings from v 1.1 should be the same from 1.2b, if I remember correctly they only updated the ensemble patches, so you can use solo strings from 1.2b or 1.1 and they will play the same.


----------



## Bollen

So... Has anyone managed a realistic sul pont or sul tasto with this library?


----------



## chapbot

Ok, let's hear some soundclips of these amazing new developments!


----------



## Virtual Virgin

Bollen said:


> So... Has anyone managed a realistic sul pont or sul tasto with this library?


I have used the timbral shaping to make patches for sul pont and sul tasto. I believe I added overtones to the sul tasto and a lot of bow noise. I thought the results work well, but I don't have anything immediately in front of me as an example.

Regarding the cello, yes I have had the same thoughts about the timbre and have tried the timbral shaping to work on that issue with positive results. The tone on the cello in particular does not sit as well as the others. 

Overall I think the library is great and spending time learning the CCs and how to achieve particular bowings really pays off. I can really sculpt a sound for each piece rather than being at the mercy of the sample set.


----------



## I like music

Virtual Virgin said:


> I have used the timbral shaping to make patches for sul pont and sul tasto. I believe I added overtones to the sul tasto and a lot of bow noise. I thought the results work well, but I don't have anything immediately in front of me as an example.
> 
> Regarding the cello, yes I have had the same thoughts about the timbre and have tried the timbral shaping to work on that issue with positive results. The tone on the cello in particular does not sit as well as the others.
> 
> Overall I think the library is great and spending time learning the CCs and how to achieve particular bowings really pays off. I can really sculpt a sound for each piece rather than being at the mercy of the sample set.


Interesting. If you had the time (and I know it is cheeky to ask) would love to know what sort of settings you applied. No problem if not.


----------



## Bollen

Virtual Virgin said:


> I have used the timbral shaping to make patches for sul pont and sul tasto. I believe I added overtones to the sul tasto and a lot of bow noise.


After an hour of playing with the settings I'm nowhere nearer to getting a realistic tasto or pont. Perhaps if anybody has any succes with it we could share the presets...(?)


----------



## Virtual Virgin

Bollen said:


> After an hour of playing with the settings I'm nowhere nearer to getting a realistic tasto or pont. Perhaps if anybody has any succes with it we could share the presets...(?)


Try these out- two snapshots for the Solo Violin.
The sul pont has a de-emphasized fundamental, whereas the sul tasto is mostly the first harmonic.

If you can use CC's to control the timbral shaping on the sul pont I think it helps.
The spectral content seems to shift a lot as a player is bowing around near the bridge, so different partials will be sounding from moment to moment. One setting can sound too static.


----------



## Bollen

Virtual Virgin said:


> Try these out- two snapshots for the Solo Violin.
> The sul pont has a de-emphasized fundamental, whereas the sul tasto is mostly the first harmonic.
> 
> If you can use CC's to control the timbral shaping on the sul pont I think it helps.
> The spectral content seems to shift a lot as a player is bowing around near the bridge, so different partials will be sounding from moment to moment. One setting can sound too static.


Very cool and thank you for that, but yeah... Doesn't sound anything like the real thing either. The tasto sounds like an over-EQued violin and the pont is as you said: missing the erratic elements.

On the positive side, I suddenly feel like my other string libraries are not as useless any more!


----------



## robgb

muziksculp said:


> Hi,
> 
> OK, so after a while of further messing around with the *SM Solo Violin*. I found a few things that made it sound very good to my ears. This includes a new Custom Timbral Shaping setting, also for reverb/acoustics I used a bit of the built-in reverb, plus Exponential Audio's R4 reverb (they are now part of iZotope). Which made it sound very nice, and transparent sounding. I used the Violin 5s IR version. You might like one of the others, that's a matter of taste.
> 
> Here are two pics showing the Reverb settings for the Solo Violin, and R4, and another pic showing the Timbral Shaping settings, with the same R4 custom preset.


Love this library and love R4.


----------



## Virtual Virgin

Bollen said:


> Very cool and thank you for that, but yeah... Doesn't sound anything like the real thing either. The tasto sounds like an over-EQued violin and the pont is as you said: missing the erratic elements.
> 
> On the positive side, I suddenly feel like my other string libraries are not as useless any more!


Yeah, I don't think they will get much better unless there is a specific tool added to model bow placement. I made those patches to use in a context that calls for sul tasto or sul pont in a mix and would serve the basic needs of those colors. I would not use them for a demonstration in realism.

This is a particular area where Audio Modeling SWAM have an edge. Their virtual bowing can be placed anywhere in between the bridge and the neck and also includes a bow pressure parameter.


----------



## muziksculp

robgb said:


> Love this library and love R4.


Yes, this combo worked wonderfully for me. 

I haven't had the chance to work with this library for the past few days, but I'm planning to spend a few quality hours with it over the weekend. Especially now that I know I'm able to obtain a very nice timbre. I will post some more feedback after the weekend.


----------



## Virtual Virgin

Bollen said:


> Very cool and thank you for that, but yeah... Doesn't sound anything like the real thing either. The tasto sounds like an over-EQued violin and the pont is as you said: missing the erratic elements.
> 
> On the positive side, I suddenly feel like my other string libraries are not as useless any more!


I made newer versions of each. I think the sul tasto sounds better in this version. This one is less exaggerated, as after listening to a few demonstrations of sul tasto to compare, the difference from normal bowing is more subtle. Not as dark. Also, take note that the patches are without reverb or stage depth as I am using MIR over here.


----------



## DANIELE

Virtual Virgin said:


> This is a particular area where Audio Modeling SWAM have an edge. Their virtual bowing can be placed anywhere in between the bridge and the neck and also includes a bow pressure parameter.


This is because SWAM strings are totally modeled instruments while SM Strings is sample based, you cannot have the same amount of controls you have with fully modelled instruments.


----------



## muziksculp

DANIELE said:


> This is because SWAM strings are totally modeled instruments while SM Strings is sample based, you cannot have the same amount of controls you have with fully modelled instruments.


Yes, if you like using Physically Modelled Instruments, having the SWAM Solo Strings would be a no brainer. Having both the Sample Modeling, and Audio Modeling strings gives you a lot of flexibility, and sound sculpting options. 

I think Audio Modeling might be updating their SWAM-S engine soon. I'm guessing they will announce it during the Winter NAMM show. I also think the Sample Modeling Solo & Ens. Strings might be getting an update soon as well.


----------



## Virtual Virgin

DANIELE said:


> This is because SWAM strings are totally modeled instruments while SM Strings is sample based, you cannot have the same amount of controls you have with fully modelled instruments.


Not quite.
Embertone ISS is also sample based, yet they have controls for bow placement. 
It can be done.


----------



## robgb

I've always been an advocate for the SWAM strings, but really think that Sample Modeling's strings sound better. It's not until you do a side by side that you really appreciate the difference. Same with the brass.


----------



## muziksculp

robgb said:


> I've always been an advocate for the SWAM strings, but really think that Sample Modeling's strings sound better. It's not until you do a side by side that you really appreciate the difference. Same with the brass.


I'm very curious to see if the upcoming SWAM-S update will considerably improve their Solo Strings.


----------



## muziksculp

Also to be noted, that Sample Modeling do not have Woodwinds.

I also think Sample Modeling will not be making Woodwind Instruments in the future. I asked them if they will be working on Woodwinds in the future, and I have a faint recollection that they replied telling me that they won't be making woodwinds. Not sure why.


----------



## Virtual Virgin

muziksculp said:


> Also to be noted, that Sample Modeling do not have Woodwinds.
> 
> I also think Sample Modeling will not be making Woodwind Instruments in the future. I asked them if they will be working on Woodwinds in the future, and I have a faint recollection that they replied telling me that they won't be making woodwinds. Not sure why.


Sad news :(

I've been really hoping they would.


----------



## muziksculp

Listen to the *SWAM Strings* in this video, The Trumpet is the *SWAM Piccolo Trumpet*. 

I love the timbre, and realism of the SWAM Strings in this track, and the SWAM Piccolo Trumpet sounds amazing as well. It is hard to tell they are not real instruments if you didn't know that they are Physically Modeled Instruments.  and the fact is that these SWAM Instruments are going to get better via the next updates. Exciting times ahead. 

Wow !


----------



## muziksculp

Virtual Virgin said:


> Sad news :(
> 
> I've been really hoping they would.


Yes, unfortunately. 

I wonder why they won't be developing woodwinds ?


----------



## Leandro Gardini

muziksculp said:


> Also to be noted, that Sample Modeling do not have Woodwinds.
> 
> I also think Sample Modeling will not be making Woodwind Instruments in the future. I asked them if they will be working on Woodwinds in the future, and I have a faint recollection that they replied telling me that they won't be making woodwinds. Not sure why.


I remember Giorgio telling me they already have the oboe sample pool but they weren't sure if it would be made as to their next product.
I don't miss most of the new releases of sample libraries as they are just more of the same fully covered area. However, not having more development of technologies like Sample Modeling is a huge waste of potential.


----------



## muziksculp

leogardini said:


> I remember Giorgio telling me they already have the oboe sample pool but they weren't sure if it would be made as to their next product.
> I don't miss most of the new releases of sample libraries as they are just more of the same fully covered area. However, not having more development of technologies like Sample Modeling is a huge waste of potential.


Hi @leogardini ,

Yes, I agree. PM Instruments excite me so much more than traditional Sample Libraries. I'm quite sure it is the future of virtual instruments. 

There is so much potential in this field of technology relating to virtual instruments. I wish that Sample Modeling will continue their research and development efforts, because they are imho. pioneers, and innovators in this field. So much know how, and talent they have should continue to evolve, and offer more i.e. Woodwinds. 

I was told by SM support that they are working on an Update that might be out soon for their Strings, and maybe they will be updating their Brass as well. 

On the other hand, I'm glad that Audio Modeling is also moving forward, and creating some amazingly reaslistic PM Instruments, they are also expected to have an update soon. 

Cheers,
Muziksculp


----------



## Virtual Virgin

muziksculp said:


> Listen to the *SWAM Strings* in this video, The Trumpet is the *SWAM Piccolo Trumpet*.
> 
> I love the timbre, and realism of the SWAM Strings in this track, and the SWAM Piccolo Trumpet sounds amazing as well. It is hard to tell they are not real instruments if you didn't know that they are Physically Modeled Instruments.  and the fact is that these SWAM Instruments are going to get better via the next updates. Exciting times ahead.
> 
> Wow !



I do think this is a better example of SWAM strings, but I disagree about the Piccolo Trumpet here. It stands out as cartoonish to my ears. I would not use that sound myself.


----------



## Virtual Virgin

leogardini said:


> I remember Giorgio telling me they already have the oboe sample pool but they weren't sure if it would be made as to their next product.
> I don't miss most of the new releases of sample libraries as they are just more of the same fully covered area. However, not having more development of technologies like Sample Modeling is a huge waste of potential.


Good to see you here 
You have done some great work with SM Strings, upping the bar for realism.


----------



## muziksculp

Virtual Virgin said:


> I do think this is a better example of SWAM strings, but I disagree about the Piccolo Trumpet here. It stands out as cartoonish to my ears. I would not use that sound myself.


The SWAM Piccolo Trumpet is supposed to emulate a Period/Baroque Brass Instrument, which might sound different to your ears than a modern version, hence you perceive it as cartoonish, I personally don't think it sounds cartoonish, but rather very close to the sound of a Baroque Piccolo Trumpet. (Not a modern model).


----------



## robgb

muziksculp said:


> Also to be noted, that Sample Modeling do not have Woodwinds.
> 
> I also think Sample Modeling will not be making Woodwind Instruments in the future. I asked them if they will be working on Woodwinds in the future, and I have a faint recollection that they replied telling me that they won't be making woodwinds. Not sure why.


I asked Giorgio the same question, but it seems to me the answer was more along the lines of "not yet." But he didn't rule it out.


----------



## Bollen

muziksculp said:


> Listen to the *SWAM Strings* in this video, The Trumpet is the *SWAM Piccolo Trumpet*.
> 
> I love the timbre, and realism of the SWAM Strings in this track, and the SWAM Piccolo Trumpet sounds amazing as well. It is hard to tell they are not real instruments if you didn't know that they are Physically Modeled Instruments.  and the fact is that these SWAM Instruments are going to get better via the next updates. Exciting times ahead.
> 
> Wow !



No waaayyy man! I closed my eyes expecting to have my mind blown and it immediately jumped out as a synth to me. Mind you, I did play the piccolo for a while, I live with a violinist and I also play the cello, but SM can easily fool me in the right hands.

Now I will say that if this tech would have preceded sample libraries, I'm sure the purists and traditionalists would be more friendly to all things MIDI. I mean these instruments are super "musical" and really a lovely tool to show how a piece needs to be performed. I am so glad they exist! With sample libraries you are locked into having to write _for_ them if you want realism, whereas with modelling you can write to your heart's content and produce something expressive and "human". I feel they don't really directly compete... Yet! Keep an eye on a certain release this year...


----------



## DANIELE

Bollen said:


> Now I will say that if this tech would have preceded sample libraries, I'm sure the purists and traditionalists would be more friendly to all things MIDI. I mean these instruments are super "musical" and really a lovely tool to show how a piece needs to be performed. I am so glad they exist! With sample libraries you are locked into having to write _for_ them if you want realism, whereas with modelling you can write to your heart's content and produce something expressive and "human". I feel they don't really directly compete... Yet! Keep an eye on a certain release this year...


Sooo true!!

I don't use sample libraries anymore, I only want to write with that kind of libraries because I can easily think and write while before I was forced to think -> write -> bad -> think again -> write -> bad -> think again -> write -> mmmh pretty decent but not my first idea -> live with that hole in my heart.

No matter what Spitfire marketing try to put in my basket, it is always the same thing baked and baked again, I'm not interested until I will really see "everything is gonna change!".

I still use percussion as sample libraries because obviously it is a different thing from Brass, Woodwinds and Strings.

I cannot wait to see what this year will bring to us from these awesome developers.

I remember I bought SM Strings almost with eyes closed because of the need I have of playing instruments instead of programming sample sequences.


----------



## Katznegold

Can't believe I just found this thread now, after all this time tinkering with SM strings desperately trying to make them work! (because I believe this is the future)

Haven't read through everything but lots of great stuff here, right now I'm working on the basses sound - A\B ing several notes and phrases up against a library that I like the sound of (cinestrings in this case).
Going by ear and with an analyzer on both channels to try and get something similar while using only timbral shaping.
Really disappointed to find out the freaking double basses don't have subs! what gives??
(EDIT: setting the overtones to about 15-25 helps give a bit of body)
I hope they'll do something about it in the next update, even an artificial sub will do. also the high frequencies seem cut...

Will update as I go, but I really hope I won't have to use external plugins other than room to make it sound half decent.

EDIT #2: does anybody knows if enabling the timbral shaping causes for more CPU usage from the instruments?

Update 1: timbral shaping (at least for the double basses) proved to be completely useless. how disappointing.
After fighting with transients popping up when adjusting different harmonics and finding at last a good balance in the low end, I found the top end disappeared and became very thin and synthetic.
Used Waves LoAir to bring sub harmonics and saturation for the top-end and the result is now far better, though to be honest I'm not exited about the extra processing needed since I plan to do my composing with these configuration and my cpu is working hard as it is already.
Another tip is to combine SWAM strings at rather extreme settings, treating them as sort of parallel fx and blending them in at low volume.

More updates and demo's to come


----------



## Vardaro

@Katznegold
I'm not sure what you mean by "subs": additional low frequencies (e.g.sub-harmonics), or just boosted low notes?
As a classical string player, I find both SM's cellos and basses satisfactory already, but I am always ready to learn new tricks!

I still believe that this library is meant to sound like "the real thing" from a listener's distance rather than under the player's ear.

Edit. Just checked Waves plugins: those that "recreate" sub bass in our ears, and those that create real sub bass sounds.
But I wouldn't expect SM's acoustic bass (or cello..) to produce lower sounds than their original instruments. Surely that's a post production issue?


----------



## Fa

Katznegold said:


> Can't believe I just found this thread now, after all this time tinkering with SM strings desperately trying to make them work! (because I believe this is the future)
> 
> Haven't read through everything but lots of great stuff here, right now I'm working on the basses sound - A\B ing several notes and phrases up against a library that I like the sound of (cinestrings in this case).
> Going by ear and with an analyzer on both channels to try and get something similar while using only timbral shaping.
> Really disappointed to find out the freaking double basses don't have subs! what gives??
> (EDIT: setting the overtones to about 15-25 helps give a bit of body)
> I hope they'll do something about it in the next update, even an artificial sub will do. also the high frequencies seem cut...
> 
> Will update as I go, but I really hope I won't have to use external plugins other than room to make it sound half decent.
> 
> EDIT #2: does anybody knows if enabling the timbral shaping causes for more CPU usage from the instruments?
> 
> Update 1: timbral shaping (at least for the double basses) proved to be completely useless. how disappointing.
> After fighting with transients popping up when adjusting different harmonics and finding at last a good balance in the low end, I found the top end disappeared and became very thin and synthetic.
> Used Waves LoAir to bring sub harmonics and saturation for the top-end and the result is now far better, though to be honest I'm not exited about the extra processing needed since I plan to do my composing with these configuration and my cpu is working hard as it is already.
> Another tip is to combine SWAM strings at rather extreme settings, treating them as sort of parallel fx and blending them in at low volume.
> 
> More updates and demo's to come


Hi and welcome to this thread 

I wouldn't recommend at all to use the timbral shaping for the purpose you described, disregarding the resource consumption:
- it's designed for subtle small variation, and with strings it works very well for real time sound modulation effects. If you use it in an extreme and radical way what you get is just a pretty fake and synthy sound, Can be good for electric/distorted pattern not sure for realistic classical sound.

- the lack of basses is real, but in my opinion not dramatic as you describe it: the library is designed for realistic orchestral music, not for Holliwood effects. You still can get dramatic and cynematic effects with the usual processing, but starting from the original sound of the library, not manipulated or you will loose the original and acoustic texture.

I'm supporting the creators of SM in development of the new update, and the "body" and depth of all the instruments, including basses and cellos of course, it's one of the several dramatic improvements the new version will bring in our actual hope and early opinion: Giorgio is working with new and more advanced tools, models and technologies, and the results are very promising. Stay tuned!


----------



## Fa

muziksculp said:


> The SWAM Piccolo Trumpet is supposed to emulate a Period/Baroque Brass Instrument, which might sound different to your ears than a modern version, hence you perceive it as cartoonish, I personally don't think it sounds cartoonish, but rather very close to the sound of a Baroque Piccolo Trumpet. (Not a modern model).


Well... despite the fact it's a bit weird to discuss of AudioModeling Brass in a SampleModeling Strings thread LOL anyway you are right yes and no... the piccolo trumpet is not a baroque trumpet, is the modern piccolo instrument used to emulate the sound of the "clarina" register of the baroque trumpet, that was not "piccolo at all" but a lot larger, and using the upper set of harmonics and some lips articulations (or some small holes in the modern replicas) instead of valves... so another beast in my opinion, and nothing to do with the AudioModeling sound.


----------



## DANIELE

Fa said:


> I'm supporting the creators of SM in development of the new update, and the "body" and depth of all the instruments, including basses and cellos of course, it's one of the several dramatic improvements the new version will bring in our actual hope and early opinion: Giorgio is working with new and more advanced tools, models and technologies, and the results are very promising. Stay tuned!


Hi Fa!! Great to read you again and great news about this update, I can't wait to try it out.


----------



## muziksculp

Fa said:


> I'm supporting the creators of SM in development of the new update, and the "body" and depth of all the instruments, including basses and cellos of course, it's one of the several dramatic improvements the new version will bring in our actual hope and early opinion: Giorgio is working with new and more advanced tools, models and technologies, and the results are very promising. Stay tuned!


Hi @Fa,

Thanks for letting us know about this exciting Sample Modeling update, I'm super excited about it, and hope to see it released in the near future. I was aware they were working on an update, your feedback here is a nice confirmation. 

Cheers,
Muziksculp


----------



## william81723

Hi @Fa ,Please tell the creators of SM that we need a best flute and other best woodwinds.
I extremely desire them....


----------



## Katznegold

Fa said:


> Hi and welcome to this thread
> 
> I wouldn't recommend at all to use the timbral shaping for the purpose you described, disregarding the resource consumption:
> - it's designed for subtle small variation, and with strings it works very well for real time sound modulation effects. If you use it in an extreme and radical way what you get is just a pretty fake and synthy sound, Can be good for electric/distorted pattern not sure for realistic classical sound.
> 
> - the lack of basses is real, but in my opinion not dramatic as you describe it: the library is designed for realistic orchestral music, not for Holliwood effects. You still can get dramatic and cynematic effects with the usual processing, but starting from the original sound of the library, not manipulated or you will loose the original and acoustic texture.
> 
> I'm supporting the creators of SM in development of the new update, and the "body" and depth of all the instruments, including basses and cellos of course, it's one of the several dramatic improvements the new version will bring in our actual hope and early opinion: Giorgio is working with new and more advanced tools, models and technologies, and the results are very promising. Stay tuned!


Awesome to hear about that update!

regarding the sub frequencies, I know the instrument don't generate those frequencies but the room does (even with the celli I think), and I assume because SM strings were recorded in an anechoic chamber they're missing them but a room plugin can't generate them. Even though the lower sub harmonics and also extremely high harmonics aren't really audible to the human ear, I feel the extra headroom helps with the perception of depth, width and volume (in terms of size).
maybe include them in the early reflections simulation? I dunno

I appreciate SM's approach to a real life situation sound rather then hyped cinematic, because of that I'm counting on being able to reach a broad range of cinematic sounds by treating it like with real players recordings, though it's not miles away it's still not quite there yet in my opinion, but then again - it's a new product utilizing new approach and technology.

Using it also as a composing tool, I need to make it sound as best as possible to my ears with as little external processing as possible so to not have a big impact on my cpu load that I'll have latency\peaks\crashes, so too bad timbral shaping isn't the suitable tool to address this.


----------



## shawnsingh

Katznegold said:


> regarding the sub frequencies, I know the instrument don't generate those frequencies but the room does (even with the celli I think),


My guess is that this is probably not true. Room acoustics is a predominantly linear process, linear in this case means that only the phase and magnitude of existing frequencies would be changed. New frequencies would be a nonlinear process, which is a negligible part of room acoustics

Bass sounds sometimes have a fundamental frequency that is actually weaker than the first harmonic, in case that is something you had seen. It can be confused for a sub harmonic frequency.

I agree about not "filling a room" in the right way. My guess is that the realism of 3d sound propagation gets thrown away by the time the audio is represented in stereo or mono. I'm not sure if modeled instruments are taking this into account, but even if they are, the entire audio chain probably doesn't, and that info will get lost. The only way to deal with this in the current landscape of mono/stereo busses is to hand tailor some IRs that represent everything from the resonating instrument body to the microphones in one IR, instead of having separate IRs for instrument body and room reverb.


----------



## Bollen

Fa said:


> Giorgio is working with new and more advanced tools, models and technologies, and the results are very promising. Stay tuned!


OOOOoooo! Exciting!!!


----------



## decredis

shawnsingh said:


> My guess is that this is probably not true. Room acoustics is a predominantly linear process, linear in this case means that only the phase and magnitude of existing frequencies would be changed. New frequencies would be a nonlinear process, which is a negligible part of room acoustics


Is it instead a matter of lower frequency information that is generated by the instrument only being captured when recorded in a sufficiently large room, because of the long wavelengths of low frequencies? I vaguely recall reading about e.g. low brass, and how recording it only close-miked, say, would miss out lower parts of the spectrum in a way that couldn't be recovered. So, it's not that the lower frequencies are generated by the room, instead of the instrument: they're generated by the instrument and, I guess, preserved by the room.


----------



## Fa

decredis said:


> Is it instead a matter of lower frequency information that is generated by the instrument only being captured when recorded in a sufficiently large room, because of the long wavelengths of low frequencies? I vaguely recall reading about e.g. low brass, and how recording it only close-miked, say, would miss out lower parts of the spectrum in a way that couldn't be recovered. So, it's not that the lower frequencies are generated by the room, instead of the instrument: they're generated by the instrument and, I guess, preserved by the room.


It's a pretty complex matter (anyway some literature is online for the scientifically curious people  ), but we all have some tools and basics understanding to manage it:

- a room is changing spectrum of instruments, being a resonant space interfering with the source.

- if an impulse response of a room is properly made with a full-spectrum impulse, in theory that should be able of replicating the same acoustic of the corresponding real life recording. Even more if the source signal is an anechoic recording of the instrument.

Unfortunately Bass and sub frequencies are in a space difficult to manage for the software/hardware, and even the reproduction with monitors or headphones is problematic, as the interaction of the monitors with the listener's real room etc. but still we have a couple of good-sense considerations to be made before any assumption:

- the bass resonance of a room recorded and embedded into samples should sound unnatural when passed into the IR of a pretty different room, e.g. an Hall convolution of a studio recording etc. Maybe with some sweet spot and tweaking can sound "nice" but anyway it will be fake.

- DAW and plugins have precise spectrum analysers and eQ to measure the source signal and shape the output at your will. That should be the starting point, and an objective valuation of facts.


----------



## shawnsingh

decredis said:


> Is it instead a matter of lower frequency information that is generated by the instrument only being captured when recorded in a sufficiently large room, because of the long wavelengths of low frequencies? I vaguely recall reading about e.g. low brass, and how recording it only close-miked, say, would miss out lower parts of the spectrum in a way that couldn't be recovered. So, it's not that the lower frequencies are generated by the room, instead of the instrument: they're generated by the instrument and, I guess, preserved by the room.



Yeah, I think you are right. I found a cool technical paper with a quick google search: https://users.aalto.fi/~ktlokki/Publs/patynen_aaua_2010.pdf, which plots directivity patterns for various orchestral instruments. A good comparison would be Trombone in section 5.3 and Figure 23 versus Cello in section 8.3, Figure 41 and 42. Trombones have a reasonably focused directivity especially in high frequencies. But the Cello pattern is glaringly all over the place especially in lower frequencies, and in the paper they say about the cello, "Octave bands below 500 Hz are nearly omnidirectional in all planes"

OK, so Cello propagating sound omnidirectional below 500 Hz - if it's dry sampled, then it's probably recorded from only one direction... which means that a significant amount of the cello's sound energy below 500 Hz doesn't get captured by close mics.



Fa said:


> if an impulse response of a room is properly made with a full-spectrum impulse, in theory that should be able of replicating the same acoustic of the corresponding real life recording. Even more if the source signal is an anechoic recording of the instrument.



+1 agreed... but I find it fascinating to go even one step further. An impulse response is an accurate representation of (a) the position, orientation, and directivity pattern of the sound source, (b) all the acoustic reflections of that sound propagating, and (c) the position, orientation, and polarity pattern of the microphones that record the IR.

The problem is that the sound source used to record the IR, like a loudspeaker, probably won't match the position, orientation, and directivity pattern of the dry-recorded virtual instrument. So that just compounds the wrong-ness of how exactly sound propagates from the instrument through the acoustic space. I think most of the time, this problem doesn't really matter. There's enough other things happening in a mix. But I think in some cases it does matter, like when someone desires more precise early reflections that are unique to individual players, or when an instrument like Tuba needs to "fill the room" properly.


----------



## DANIELE

Fa said:


> - the bass resonance of a room recorded and embedded into samples should sound unnatural when passed into the IR of a pretty different room, e.g. an Hall convolution of a studio recording etc. Maybe with some sweet spot and tweaking can sound "nice" but anyway it will be fake.
> 
> - DAW and plugins have precise spectrum analysers and eQ to measure the source signal and shape the output at your will. That should be the starting point, and an objective valuation of facts.



So could be useful to think about EQing the instrument after it passes the fake IR to avoid the fake effect, am I right?


----------



## aileero

shawnsingh said:


> Yeah, I think you are right. I found a cool technical paper with a quick google search: https://users.aalto.fi/~ktlokki/Publs/patynen_aaua_2010.pdf, which plots directivity patterns for various orchestral instruments. A good comparison would be Trombone in section 5.3 and Figure 23 versus Cello in section 8.3, Figure 41 and 42. Trombones have a reasonably focused directivity especially in high frequencies. But the Cello pattern is glaringly all over the place especially in lower frequencies, and in the paper they say about the cello, "Octave bands below 500 Hz are nearly omnidirectional in all planes"
> 
> OK, so Cello propagating sound omnidirectional below 500 Hz - if it's dry sampled, then it's probably recorded from only one direction... which means that a significant amount of the cello's sound energy below 500 Hz doesn't get captured by close mics.
> 
> 
> 
> +1 agreed... but I find it fascinating to go even one step further. An impulse response is an accurate representation of (a) the position, orientation, and directivity pattern of the sound source, (b) all the acoustic reflections of that sound propagating, and (c) the position, orientation, and polarity pattern of the microphones that record the IR.
> 
> The problem is that the sound source used to record the IR, like a loudspeaker, probably won't match the position, orientation, and directivity pattern of the dry-recorded virtual instrument. So that just compounds the wrong-ness of how exactly sound propagates from the instrument through the acoustic space. I think most of the time, this problem doesn't really matter. There's enough other things happening in a mix. But I think in some cases it does matter, like when someone desires more precise early reflections that are unique to individual players, or when an instrument like Tuba needs to "fill the room" properly.



That's pretty interesting actually, I know that software like Odeon and Catt-acoustic are able to simulate rooms with sound source directivity specific to instruments, and creates impulse responses using 3d models. I wonder if these year old software might be the solution to the reverb problems composers have been facing! It is a bit (a LOT) out of our price range though... 
It is also the most complicated looking software I've personally seen...


----------



## I like music

Fa said:


> Stay tuned!


Nice! Do you have a _rough rough rough_ estimate? Are we talking weeks or months or end of year?


----------



## DANIELE

shawnsingh said:


> Yeah, I think you are right. I found a cool technical paper with a quick google search: https://users.aalto.fi/~ktlokki/Publs/patynen_aaua_2010.pdf, which plots directivity patterns for various orchestral instruments.


I'll download it and read it, maybe my engineering background could help me to understand something. 

EDIT

I tried to download it and it happened that it was already on my PC, I must read it immediately!!


----------



## muziksculp

So, does Audio Modeling's Solo Strings Cello, and Bass have more Low Frequencies present in compared to Sample Modeling Solo Cello, and Bass, given Audio Modeling doesn't rely on mics, or sampling ?


----------



## Fa

DANIELE said:


> So could be useful to think about EQing the instrument after it passes the fake IR to avoid the fake effect, am I right?


Not really what I was meaning, but yes of course you can and it may help in some situations (several Convolution softwares do it inside preset, for instance, with dedicated eQ for instruments or special positions etc.). 

I was anyway referring to the fact that with accurate listening and watching the spectrum analysis, you may always notice real link between frequencies picks, ambience, and acoustic result.


----------



## Fa

I like music said:


> Nice! Do you have a _rough rough rough_ estimate? Are we talking weeks or months or end of year?


I'm very sorry but I don't know. I can say the following:

- we can't predict dates yet, because we are in development stage, then the risk of unexpected barriers or new opportunities is still very high, and creating expectations should be wrong.

- the update will come, and will be adding features and improvements, then I think SM will be very happy disclosing more infos as soon as the final content and timeline will be defined.

Anyway it's not a matter of weeks, but hopefully not years LOL


----------



## Peter Siedlaczek

I´d like to add my 2 cents concerning two keywords which appeared in this thread: "Subs" or "subharmonics" and "IR/reverb", even if most of these things are probably well known to many.

Please note that strings do not have any harmonic content below the fundamental. If there is anything - it´s the bow noise which in the lower register has a very low energy anyway, so it´s negligible. (Lower open strings which are resonating and introducing some "dirt" because it´s not easy to damp them, are of course not "subharmonics".) In case of double bass, BTW, the lowest tones are around 32 Hz. What "subharmonic" content shall we expect below that?

If the energy of the fundamental frequency is meant here, it is (in our instruments) entirely under players control using the first bar of the timbral shaper. However, too high fundamental level can sound very "boomy" - please try... 

Please consider that a (natural) reverb - i.e. reflections - do not generate frequencies which are not present in the source. That means no content, no "subharmonics" can be added by the room if they are absent in the source. A room/hall/studio can of course boost some frequencies. Theoretically also the (weak) content below the fundamental. But please consider, that the aim of a perfect studio acoustic design is a possibly flat overall spectrum of its impulse response, especially in the low and medium range. If there is a boost, it´s usually a strong resonance of the room which would be devastating when used for any quality recording. The best example is a bathroom , having usually a resonance/boost at somewhere between 200 - 300 Hz... This is certainly nothing we want to have 

Acoustic environment is, no doubt, essential for the sound quality and its realism. We chose the anechoic sampling environment not only to allow the modeling of the samples using Giorgio´s harmonic alignment, but also to give you a pure, raw material to which you can add your favorite, complex ambience without doubling it with anything inside the samples. Now we are also working on some new techniques to further improve the spectral balance, also emulating a more distant miking. This approach is a very complex one and is still subject to further investigations.

The workload is unpredictable... So please forgive us if we cannot estimate how long will it take .

Peter


----------



## I like music

Peter Siedlaczek said:


> The workload is unpredictable... So please forgive us if we cannot estimate how long will it take .


21st Jan at NAMM? Haha, sorry, couldn't resist. 

Thanks for the explanation. Really interesting to hear (even if it is over my head sometimes).

Good luck with your endeavours. Sounds promising!


----------



## Bollen

Peter Siedlaczek said:


> Now we are also working on some new techniques to further improve the spectral balance, also emulating a more distant miking. This approach is a very complex one and is still subject to further investigations.


Will this work include sul ponticello emulations and/or harder bow settings?


----------



## Peter Siedlaczek

Not for the time being, but this seems like a worthwhile subject of future investigation.


----------



## Vardaro

Even without new technologies, it would be good (for some..) to have some "stylistic presets" using existing parameters. E.g. Beginning Noodler, Wild Gypsy, Stringy Folk, Prissy Viennese, Syruppy Soup,
or even Imitation Synth Pad........


----------



## justthere

It’s worth considering also that a recording is not just a representation of acoustics, but also of the audio path, and any effect that might have on the source. So if you record with some degree of saturation from microphones and electronics, you get the benefit of that sound. To me the richness that I expect of strings is attained by using IR’s recorded through a good chain. I love to use the Altiverb Fox stage on the dry SM strings - this has given me a cinematic sound and pleasant thickness in the low end as a foundation in addition to providing directional/spatial cues, and I use something else for tail. And some of the EW Spaces stuff which was recorded really well is very useful in that way also.


----------



## Fa

Vardaro said:


> Even without new technologies, it would be good (for some..) to have some "stylistic presets" using existing parameters. E.g. Beginning Noodler, Wild Gypsy, Stringy Folk, Prissy Viennese, Syruppy Soup,
> or even Imitation Synth Pad........


+ 1 
I proposed it to Giorgio and Peter several times, and I still hope that we will be able of managing it somehow/sometime. 
Unfortunately some logistic barriers and priorities are influencing the choices of Sample Modeling, but if a way of managing the topic without an excessive need of re-design and re-development will be found, I still hope it can be considered. I got the challenge to make proposal and consult... if I find a (viable) answer (and users support/feedback/suggestions) perhaps I will be able of supporting... 

An easy and initial step should be a sharing platform of parameters/practice/user-presets and a "forum" of interested people. The SampleModeling web forum is ready to host us to start the job whenever we want by the way!


----------



## Vardaro

I was thinking of presets in the form of additional "instruments".
(I'm more in the Prissy Viennese With Exciting Moments category)


----------



## Katznegold

Would anyone else appreciate articulation switching through midi cc in addition to keyswitches? 
within one knob or fader to move between arco-tremolo-pizzicato-col legno


----------



## Bollen

Katznegold said:


> Would anyone else appreciate articulation switching through midi cc in addition to keyswitches?
> within one knob or fader to move between arco-tremolo-pizzicato-col legno


Not really any difference for me personally, however one that would move from tasto to normal to pont would be incredible!!! I know, I know... I'll stop flogging that dead horse...


----------



## muziksculp

Hi,

I'm trying to get a larger/fuller celli ensemble sound when using the Sample Modeling Cello Ensemble.

i.e. Playing two low notes in octaves (D1 and D2) , but I'm still not happy with the way the ensemble sounds, it still sounds like two solo celli, or very small ensemble. I have the Internal IR of Kontakt turned off, so that might be one factor. Especially when compared with a large ensemble sample library.

Here is an audio demo first the Sample Modeling Celli playing Spiccato style (High Vel), and then OT-Berlin Symphonic Strings playing the same notes. I added a bit of R4 Reverb to both libraries. 

Anyone able to get a larger/fuller sound from the sample modeling ensembles ? Any tips ? or is this not possible ?

Thanks,
Muziksculp


----------



## I like music

muziksculp said:


> Hi,
> 
> I'm trying to get a larger/fuller celli ensemble sound when using the Sample Modeling Cello Ensemble.
> 
> i.e. Playing two low notes in octaves (D1 and D2) , but I'm still not happy with the way the ensemble sounds, it still sounds like two solo celli, or very small ensemble. I have the Internal IR of Kontakt turned off, so that might be one factor. Especially when compared with a large ensemble sample library.
> 
> Here is an audio demo first the Sample Modeling Celli playing Spiccato style (High Vel), and then OT-Berlin Symphonic Strings playing the same notes. I added a bit of R4 Reverb to both libraries.
> 
> Anyone able to get a larger/fuller sound from the sample modeling ensembles ? Any tips ? or is this not possible ?
> 
> Thanks,
> Muziksculp


Hard to compare those examples (I think reverb could help) but generally I'd agree with you. Though this is an excellent strings package, I think one area where the timbre wasn't quite how I expected was in the cellos. Yes, they didn't have that depth. I feel like it was almost too much the other way compared to version 1. Did you ever have version 1? It had those big booming quality (not in a good way) and you had a few low frequencies really stick out. While that problem went away, I feel that they sound a bit thin. 

Anyhow, curious and excited to see what they're working on.


----------



## muziksculp

I like music said:


> Anyhow, curious and excited to see what they're working on.


Me too. Especially if they can improve the ensembles, to make them sound bigger, and fuller sounding. imho. That's one of the weak areas of this library.


----------



## DANIELE

muziksculp said:


> Hi,
> 
> I'm trying to get a larger/fuller celli ensemble sound when using the Sample Modeling Cello Ensemble.
> 
> i.e. Playing two low notes in octaves (D1 and D2) , but I'm still not happy with the way the ensemble sounds, it still sounds like two solo celli, or very small ensemble. I have the Internal IR of Kontakt turned off, so that might be one factor. Especially when compared with a large ensemble sample library.
> 
> Here is an audio demo first the Sample Modeling Celli playing Spiccato style (High Vel), and then OT-Berlin Symphonic Strings playing the same notes. I added a bit of R4 Reverb to both libraries.
> 
> Anyone able to get a larger/fuller sound from the sample modeling ensembles ? Any tips ? or is this not possible ?
> 
> Thanks,
> Muziksculp


As far as I know they did some trick to avoid to much spread with high velocity, just to enable the user to get a sharper sound. This is why probably they sound like this. I assume that you also tried with maximum size.

Maybe try also to work on the "distance" knob in the virtual stage section, doing this helped me to get a better sound combined with my space, because the sound seems more upfront than berlin in your example.

There also obviously something buried in the library and not user accessible. I'm sure they will do better with the future updates.


----------



## muziksculp

DANIELE said:


> As far as I know they did some trick to avoid to much spread with high velocity, just to enable the user to get a sharper sound. This is why probably they sound like this. I assume that you also tried with maximum size.
> 
> Maybe try also to work on the "distance" knob in the virtual stage section, doing this helped me to get a better sound combined with my space, because the sound seems more upfront than berlin in your example.
> 
> There also obviously something buried in the library and not user accessible. I'm sure they will do better with the future updates.


I'm not adding any of the Sample Modeling IR effect signal (It's on a separate Kontakt output, you can control the amount of the IR via the output fader). So, I will experiment with adding it, I have a feeling it will help make them sound fuller, and sound more like a larger ensemble. Maybe the IR signal must be used as an integral part of ensembles patches by design, so omitting this signal causes them to sound thin, and small.

I will post some more audio demos as I experiment further.


----------



## DANIELE

muziksculp said:


> I'm not adding any of the Sample Modeling IR effect signal (It's on a separate Kontakt output, you can control the amount of the IR via the output fader). So, I will experiment with adding it, I have a feeling it will help make them sound fuller, and sound more like a larger ensemble. Maybe the IR signal must be used as an integral part of ensembles patches by design, so omitting this signal causes them to sound thin, and small.
> 
> I will post some more audio demos as I experiment further.


I also turned off them in the first place, then I added them back but as a light touch and I must say I had better results.


----------



## I like music

DANIELE said:


> I also turned off them in the first place, then I added them back but as a light touch and I must say I had better results.


Agreed. I actually had them on more than just a touch, and it definitely helped a lot.


----------



## Vardaro

Strange, in the Berlin example I hear added F#, and different reverb, so I'm not sure what to conclude.

But sure we need these dry, realistic samples, then it's up to us to give them the space necessary to amplify and circulate the low frequencies?


----------



## muziksculp

Vardaro said:


> Strange, in the Berlin example I hear added F#, and different reverb, so I'm not sure what to conclude.


No, I used the same reverb on both (R4) same send amount, and setting for both libraries. Only playing an the notes D1+D2 , no F#. Maybe you need to check your monitors, or your hearing.


----------



## muziksculp

Vardaro said:


> But sure we need these dry, realistic samples


Yes, sure we do, but are these dry realistic samples emulating a medium to large size ensemble ? or just two celli ? The dry ensembles alone sound too small, almost like only two celli playing. So, to get a larger ensemble, the IR signal needs to be mixed into the dry signal to make it emulate a larger ensemble of Celli playing. It's not the room reverb I'm referring to, but the Instrument's IR.


----------



## muziksculp

Hi,

OK, I added three solo Celli to the Celli Ensemble, changed the timbral shaping curves for each of the Solo Cellos so each one has a unique timbre.

I also added a fair amount of the Effects Signal for the Celli Ensembles via the Output fader, around -16.2 dbs mixed in with the main dry signal, to make it sound a bit fuller. Also added R4 reverb on all the instruments. So this is one Celli Ensemble patch, and three SM Solo Cellos.

Here is SM audio first playing the eight Spicc. Notes, followed by OT-Berlin Symph. Strings playing the same notes.

I think there is a notable improvement in the way the SM Celli Spicc. sounds now compared to the previous demo, without the SM effect, and without the three solo cellos.


----------



## clisma

muziksculp said:


> No, I used the same reverb on both (R4) same send amount, and setting for both libraries. Only playing an the notes D1+D2 , no F#. Maybe you need to check your monitors, or your hearing.


Most definitely hearing an added third of F# in the BS bit. You might not have played it, but that doesn’t mean it’s not there. Also, nice job on thickening up the SM Celli in your second example, works well!


----------



## muziksculp

clisma said:


> Most definitely hearing an added third of F# in the BS bit. You might not have played it, but that doesn’t mean it’s not there. Also, nice job on thickening up the SM Celli in your second example, works well!


OK Thanks for the feedback.

I will check the OT-BSS Spicc. F# you are hearing, It's very strange that an F# would be sounding out of the blues, if I only played D1-D2 interval. If it is a bug/defective sample mapping, I will report it to Orchestral Tools, it could also be triggered at the highest velocities, I will look into this.

Yes, adding the solo cellos helped thicken the sound of the ensembles, also adding the Effects Output IR to the ensembles.


----------



## muziksculp

Here is a video capture showing a Tuner Inserted into the OT-BSS Celli Spicc. Track. It does fluctuate above and below the D, but I don't see F# as a target note in the tuner readings, I think the tuner is having a bit of a hard time keeping up with the fast, short notes of the track.


----------



## Vardaro

The F# sounds a bit flat, like a 5th harmonic, rather than a tempered third.
It could be some form of harmonic distortion, in my phones, ...or in my ears!
We need to hear the D1 & D2 separately.

But the improved extract is indeed successful in turning a perfectly good library into another perfectly good library.
I'll stick to Prissy Viennese.


----------



## DANIELE

Vardaro said:


> The F# sounds a bit flat, like a 5th harmonic, rather than a tempered third.
> It could be some form of harmonic distortion, in my phones, ...or in my ears!
> We need to hear the D1 & D2 separately.
> 
> But the improved extract is indeed successful in turning a perfectly good library into another perfectly good library.
> I'll stick to Prissy Viennese.


Do you have perfect pitch?


----------



## Leandro Gardini

muziksculp said:


> No, I used the same reverb on both (R4) same send amount, and setting for both libraries. Only playing an the notes D1+D2 , no F#. Maybe you need to check your monitors, or your hearing.


I guess I also have to check my monitors and my hearing because those F#s are blatant to me.
it’s hard to compare the thickness when there’s an illusion of a second note in one of them.


----------



## I like music

Ah, I'm definitely hearing a distinct extra note there. I don't have good ears, but definitely there's an interval there which is quite prominent.

That said, nice work on thickening it up. Could I ask if you could try playing a sustained line comparison using the setup on the SM strings?


----------



## Rob

those partials are very noticeable indeed, not strange in a low and rich tone like these... here's a screenshot



from Transcribe "note guesses":


----------



## Vardaro

@ Daniele no I haven't got Perfect (i.e.Absolute) Pitch, but I play string quartets and sing unaccompanied madrigals, and no-one complains.
Very fond of Pure (5:4) Thirds...when appropriate.
And Prissy Viennese strings...


----------



## muziksculp

Rob said:


> those partials are very noticeable indeed, not strange in a low and rich tone like these... here's a screenshot
> 
> 
> 
> from Transcribe "note guesses":


Interesting. I agree, this could just be the nature of these lower frequencies sounding very rich, and having the additional partials, including the F# that's audible, I also see the Perfect fifth (A) partial very present in this graph. So, it's not just the F#. How come no one mentioned they heard an (A) which is even more present than the F# in the graph ?


----------



## Fa

muziksculp said:


> I'm not adding any of the Sample Modeling IR effect signal (It's on a separate Kontakt output, you can control the amount of the IR via the output fader). So, I will experiment with adding it, I have a feeling it will help make them sound fuller, and sound more like a larger ensemble. Maybe the IR signal must be used as an integral part of ensembles patches by design, so omitting this signal causes them to sound thin, and small.
> 
> I will post some more audio demos as I experiment further.


I would not recommend using them at all, if you process the sound in any other space: they were supposed for audition and stand-alone purpose only.

The controls for sound are in the "Virtual Sound Stage" instead, where you may control some interesting parameters like distance, stereo image and early reflections etc.

To get a bigger Celli section sound (waiting for the upcoming update that will add some amazing new options and sounds) you may still have 2 instances with slightly different parameters, if the resources consuption isn't excessive for your system (otherwise you may work with bounced track): differentiating the sound of 2 instances with different IR (cc100) and different ensemble size (cc95) you get a very interesting "bolder" effect.


----------



## muziksculp

Fa said:


> I would not recommend using them at all, if you process the sound in any other space: they were supposed for audition and stand-alone purpose only.


Are you referring to the effects output of Kontakt, you are recommending to not use it ? 



Fa said:


> To get a bigger Celli section sound (waiting for the upcoming update that will add some amazing new options and sounds) you may still have 2 instances with slightly different parameters, if the resources consuption isn't excessive for your system (otherwise you may work with bounced track): differentiating the sound of 2 instances with different IR (cc100) and different ensemble size (cc95) you get a very interesting "bolder" effect.


Thanks for the tip, I will try using 2 instances of the Celli Ens. with slightly different settings. 

I'm also very excited, and looking forward to the upcoming update, and what it will offer.


----------



## robgb

leogardini said:


> I guess I also have to check my monitors and my hearing because those F#s are blatant to me.
> it’s hard to compare the thickness when there’s an illusion of a second note in one of them.


I'm hearing it too, but I do have perfect pitch.


----------



## muziksculp

robgb said:


> I'm hearing it too, but I do have perfect pitch.


So, you don't hear the 'A' ?


----------



## Rob

muziksculp said:


> So, you don't hear the 'A' ?


I did hear the A as well, very clear, in the first group of notes. Then the F# becomes more audible than the A. The graph I posted refers only tho the first one... anyway, the degree of similitude between D and A is higher, due to the simpler frequency ratio (1/2) I believe, so maybe the A is more difficult to hear because it fuses more with the D


----------



## muziksculp

Rob said:


> I did hear the A as well, very clear, in the first group of notes. Then the F# becomes more audible than the A. The graph I posted refers only tho the first one... anyway, the degree of similitude between D and A is higher, due to the simpler frequency ratio (1/2) I believe, so maybe the A is more difficult to hear because it fuses more with the D


Thanks for the feedback. 

So, do you feel this is normal ? or there is an issue with the library ?


----------



## Rob

muziksculp said:


> Thanks for the feedback.
> 
> So, do you feel this is normal ? or there is an issue with the library ?


It's a common acoustic phenomenon, nothing to do with the library... basically, any low D with sufficient harmonics sounds like a D major, even as a D7 sometimes. Try that on a piano playing an ff D2 and you hear it


----------



## muziksculp

Rob said:


> It's a common acoustic phenomenon, nothing to do with the library... basically, any low D with sufficient harmonics sounds like a D major, even as a D7 sometimes. Try that on a piano playing an ff D2 and you hear it


That's what I was suspecting. 

Thanks again. I appreciate your helpful feedback.


----------



## DANIELE

Fa said:


> The controls for sound are in the "Virtual Sound Stage" instead, where you may control some interesting parameters like distance, stereo image and early reflections etc.



Exactly what I meant some posts ago, using that section of the library controls is very helpful to get a better realistic sound and blend the strings with the orchestra. I especially found the Distance knob very very useful.



Fa said:


> To get a bigger Celli section sound (waiting for the upcoming update that will add some amazing new options and sounds) you may still have 2 instances with slightly different parameters, if the resources consuption isn't excessive for your system (otherwise you may work with bounced track): differentiating the sound of 2 instances with different IR (cc100) and different ensemble size (cc95) you get a very interesting "bolder" effect.



You have to stop to tease us or I'll come to your home, we live in the same country so if my region color and yours are yellow I could do it for real. 



robgb said:


> I'm hearing it too, but I do have perfect pitch.


Could you please give me a bit of it? It would be very helpful.


----------



## Bollen

DANIELE said:


> Could you please give me a bit of it? It would be very helpful.


In case you haven't seen it:


----------



## Fa

muziksculp said:


> Are you referring to the effects output of Kontakt, you are recommending to not use it ?


Yes the main output send effect is an additional feature for stand alone use of the instrument. For positioning and mixing it in convolution or virtual stages environments it's better to use the "dry" version (that is just the same without the send output convolution-reverb).

Of course you can create a chain of reverbs, as described by some users, keeping a bit of this one then adding something else etc. but the result is often not better, at the cost of additional CPU load and unreal acoustics.

In my experience 1 single positioning plug-in (e.g. simple balance, or binaural, VSS2, MIR etc.) + 1 convolution for the full orchestra is a winning solution (with or without algorithmic reverb as final touch). 
In my personal opinion you should adjust/process and get the source dry sound already thick enough before ambience, and not delegating the thickness to reverb, for the most realistic result.


----------



## muziksculp

Fa said:


> Yes the main output send effect is an additional feature for stand alone use of the instrument. For positioning and mixing it in convolution or virtual stages environments it's better to use the "dry" version (that is just the same without the send output convolution-reverb).
> 
> Of course you can create a chain of reverbs, as described by some users, keeping a bit of this one then adding something else etc. but the result is often not better, at the cost of additional CPU load and unreal acoustics.
> 
> In my experience 1 single positioning plug-in (e.g. simple balance, or binaural, VSS2, MIR etc.) + 1 convolution for the full orchestra is a winning solution (with or without algorithmic reverb as final touch).
> In my personal opinion you should adjust/process and get the source dry sound already thick enough before ambience, and not delegating the thickness to reverb, for the most realistic result.


Hi @Fa ,

Thanks for the helpful feedback. I'm still experimenting and trying to obtain a larger section sound using the Celli Ensemble. 

But, I still find it a bit challenging to get what I want to hear as far as fuller/lusher bigger ensemble size type sound using this library, although I'm still experimenting with it. Maybe the next update will offer some new tools that can help in this area of the library. 

Cheers,
Muziksculp


----------



## DANIELE

Bollen said:


> In case you haven't seen it:



MY GOD!! I feel better now. Thank you.


----------



## muziksculp

Hi,

I was watching this video showing the SM Solo Violin in action. So, I'm trying to make sense of some of the parameters in the automation curves shown in the video, and how they are being used in making this track sound realistic, and alive. 

Automated parameters shown are : Expression, Overtones, Modulation, Pitch, Detache, Timbral Shaping. 

i.e. 

What are the 'Pitch' automations doing in this track ? I'm guessing it is modulating the pitch in small amounts, but why ? and how important is it to apply this type of modulation ? 

'Detache' Automation is turning it ON-OFF, how important is this ? Would it sound very different if it was not used ? 

'Overtones', I'm guessing this is to add some color, and shine to the bowing sounds, especially when playing fast bows. 

'Timbral Shaping' , adding more color, and timbral variation to the sound of the solo violin. 

'Modulation' , controlling the vibrato amount. 

Any feedback from SM-Solo & Ensemble Strings users on this track, and the automation parameters being used, and in general in general when using this library would be very interesting, and helpful. 

Thanks,
Muziksculp


----------



## I like music

muziksculp said:


> Hi,
> 
> I was watching this video showing the SM Solo Violin in action. So, I'm trying to make sense of some of the parameters in the automation curves shown in the video, and how they are being used in making this track sound realistic, and alive.
> 
> Automated parameters shown are : Expression, Overtones, Modulation, Pitch, Detache, Timbral Shaping.
> 
> i.e.
> 
> What are the 'Pitch' automations doing in this track ? I'm guessing it is modulating the pitch in small amounts, but why ? and how important is it to apply this type of modulation ?
> 
> 'Detache' Automation is turning it ON-OFF, how important is this ? Would it sound very different if it was not used ?
> 
> 'Overtones', I'm guessing this is to add some color, and shine to the bowing sounds, especially when playing fast bows.
> 
> 'Timbral Shaping' , adding more color, and timbral variation to the sound of the solo violin.
> 
> 'Modulation' , controlling the vibrato amount.
> 
> Any feedback from SM-Solo & Ensemble Strings users on this track, and the automation parameters being used, and in general in general when using this library would be very interesting, and helpful.
> 
> Thanks,
> Muziksculp



All I can say is that in an ensemble context the Detache (haven't tried it with the solo strings as I haven't written for them!) really does help/can add a much needed rebow type sound. Very well worth applying this and testing what kind of sound you get. I'd say it is a must in fact.


----------



## Vardaro

Pitch deviations? (especially at the start of a note)
Jascha Heifetz once said that he didn't play more in tune than other violinists, like them he played very nearly in tune, but he corrected much faster.
The same would apply to the brilliant (and delightful!) Hilary Hahn.

Vibrato?
Even Heifetz, with his constant, tight, rapid vbrato, varied it with great subtlety.
Synchronising its speed and amplitude to dynamics or expression will sound like a good but not excellent player. It should be slightly randomised, even if well programmed.

In ensembles, the players' vibratos are not synchronised, which gives the velvety warmth we like so much.. (The same should apply to ensemble tremolo, which should "shimmer", not "rattle").

All this is my not-so-humble opinion.....


----------



## Fa

muziksculp said:


> What are the 'Pitch' automations doing in this track ? I'm guessing it is modulating the pitch in small amounts, but why ? and how important is it to apply this type of modulation ?
> 
> 'Detache' Automation is turning it ON-OFF, how important is this ? Would it sound very different if it was not used ?
> 
> 'Overtones', I'm guessing this is to add some color, and shine to the bowing sounds, especially when playing fast bows.
> 
> 'Timbral Shaping' , adding more color, and timbral variation to the sound of the solo violin.
> 
> 'Modulation' , controlling the vibrato amount.
> 
> Any feedback from SM-Solo & Ensemble Strings users on this track, and the automation parameters being used, and in general in general when using this library would be very interesting, and helpful.
> 
> Thanks,
> Muziksculp



Detachè automation:
it's a convenient and automatic way to get:
- up-bow-down-bow and attack sound 
- perfect connection between notes, even with large intervals (impossible for hands/finger on the MIDI keyboard)

You may get similar or even better results programming (precisely and painfully  single notes, but obviously this feature is a very effective and convenient shortcut for some passages.

Overtones:
Strong attacks on a violin tend to generate overtones (temporary suppression of the lower frequency) but just for an instant before the sound stabilize: you may mimic and fine tune the effect with the Overtones controller, but never exceed and never make it longer than a quick attack, or it won't be realistic.

Timbral shaping:
modulating the sound as you correctly understand, to mimic the timbral difference created by expressive bowing in real life. Every difference in bow strength and position is producing a slightly different tone, (that's impossible to reproduce by samples, even with round-robin, to avoid arbitrary and chaotic sound, then it's better to give option and control to the user): with very subtle modulation of high odd harmonics you may get a good simulation of it.

Pitch bend:
despite the fact that the SM violin has a sophisticated AI algorithm "modelling" the samples according the musical context (velocity, legato, duration of notes) and controllers (attack, detuning, dynamic modulation, pitch to dynamic etc.) still the amount of detuning a real player use in a clever and musical way to fix technical issues and fingering, and to follow expression is SO HIGH, that it should be impossible to program it without arbitrary and clichè poor result. The best way to get it is to play it or to program it following the real life expression of a real player (e.g. to mimic the slide at the beginning of a note and the instability of the intonation that are not totally random but depending on speed, tension, style, phrasing etc. then every time different and unpredictable for an algorithm).

Vardaro told the rest already


----------



## muziksculp

Hi,

@I like music , @Vardaro , and @Fa .

Thanks for your helpful feedback regarding the automation parameters video I posted.

I'm still experimenting, and diving deeper into how to best use this quite sophisticated library, it has so much to offer, and is so flexible, and perfect to customize it to ones taste. That's why I'm so interested in being able to use all of its important automatable parameters to make it sound as realistic as possible. I might have more questions as I continue my experimentations.

Thanks to this tip from @Fa. I'm now using VSL's MIR-Pro Teledex venue, applying very small amount of the venue's sound, but mostly using it to position the SM Strings in a hall, I then add some high-quality reverb to get some nice Release Tails from the various string sections/solos. This so far has given me the best sonic results.

I'm also getting some nice results by layering a Solo String instrument, with the section sound to add more definition, and attack to the sound when needed, but mixed in at a lower volume.

I would love to read more tips, and see more technical videos on the various automation parameters, and how they can be used to make this library come alive, and sound super realistic.

Oh.. I should also add that I also think the Pizz. articulations of this library are not that great, and can use some improvements.

Cheers,
Muziksculp


----------



## muziksculp

It would be very useful if there were some detailed video tutorials on how to use, and automate the various key parameters of this library via short examples. I don't think there any on YouTube. 

Maybe Sample Modeling could make some in the future.


----------



## Fa

muziksculp said:


> It would be very useful if there were some detailed video tutorials on how to use, and automate the various key parameters of this library via short examples. I don't think there any on YouTube.
> 
> Maybe Sample Modeling could make some in the future.


Actually they aren't on YouTube. But they are on Vimeo. anyway you may access them on the SM website with tutorials and walkthrough product pages:
https://www.samplemodeling.com/products/strings/tutorials


----------



## muziksculp

I really enjoyed watching Leonardo Gardini's video tutorials for SM Solo & Ens Strings.

I would like to see more of this type of tutorials showing a piece of music be it classical piece, or classic, or modern film score, and then explain how the string sounds were programmed using SM Solo & Ens. Strings. to achieve specific sonic results, ..etc.

That would be so helpful, and a great learning tool.

Here is his Lord of The Rings Tutorial using SM Solo & Ens. Strings.


----------



## Leandro Gardini

muziksculp said:


> I really enjoyed watching Leonardo Gardini's video tutorials for SM Solo & Ens Strings.
> 
> I would like to see more of this type of tutorials showing a piece of music be it classical piece, or classic, or modern film score, and then explain how the string sounds were programmed using SM Solo & Ens. Strings. to achieve specific sonic results, ..etc.
> 
> That would be so helpful, and a great learning tool.


I am glad it helped you. I may work on more videos like these upon request.
And I wouldn’t mind if my parents registered me as Leonardo.🙂


----------



## muziksculp

Hi @leogardini ,



leogardini said:


> I am glad it helped you. I may work on more videos like these upon request.


You got my request.

Your course Scoring Tools Master Class sounds very interesting, although It's on the higher price range compared to other options. I was wondering if you have thought of making more affordable courses that cover more focused areas in the future ? or maybe a monthly subscription based tutorials website ?

Thanks.


----------



## muziksculp

Hi @leogardini , 

Oh.. Sorry, I forgot to ask you one more question.  

As far as *Sample Modeling : Solo & Ensemble Strings* library, which is quite an impressive library, what areas/features of this library would you like to see improved to make it even more impressive ? 

I know the Sample Modeling team are working on an Update for this library, that might be released in the near future. So, I'm very much looking forward to see what they did to further improve it. 

Thanks,
Muziksculp


----------



## Leandro Gardini

muziksculp said:


> Hi @leogardini ,
> 
> 
> You got my request.
> 
> Your course Scoring Tools Master Class sounds very interesting, although It's on the higher price range compared to other options. I was wondering if you have thought of making more affordable courses that cover more focused areas in the future ? or maybe a monthly subscription based tutorials website ?
> 
> Thanks.


I am working on a major update of the course now. Once it’s done I plan to break the course into smaller parts which will be same as quick courses. It will take a while though.


----------



## Leandro Gardini

muziksculp said:


> Hi @leogardini ,
> 
> Oh.. Sorry, I forgot to ask you one more question.
> 
> As far as *Sample Modeling : Solo & Ensemble Strings* library, which is quite an impressive library, what areas/features of this library would you like to see improved to make it even more impressive ?
> 
> I know the Sample Modeling team are working on an Update for this library, that might be released in the near future. So, I'm very much looking forward to see what they did to further improve it.
> 
> Thanks,
> Muziksculp


I think the participant of this thread already mentioned all aspects that can be improved.
Better timbre (specially on the cellos), sharper attacks on short notes, playable glisses, sul pont, sul tasto, sul (specific strings), controllable pressure of the bow, harmonic glisses and improved virtual stage are some of them.
The developers are very responsive to our suggestions and I am sure they will come up with a substantial advancement.


----------



## muziksculp

leogardini said:


> I am working on a major update of the course now. Once it’s done I plan to break the course into smaller parts which will be same as quick courses. It will take a while though.


That would be wonderful. Very good to hear about that. 

Thanks.


----------



## muziksculp

Question : I'm trying to check if I'm using version 1.2 b , my preset patches show (v. 1.2), instead of (v. 1.2b), does this indicate that I'm not using version 1.2 b ? 

Anyway to tell what version I'm using ? 

Any feedback on this would be appreciated. 

Thanks.


----------



## DANIELE

muziksculp said:


> Question : I'm trying to check if I'm using version 1.2 b , my preset patches show (v. 1.2), instead of (v. 1.2b), does this indicate that I'm not using version 1.2 b ?
> 
> Anyway to tell what version I'm using ?
> 
> Any feedback on this would be appreciated.
> 
> Thanks.


My patches all have 1.2b after the instrument name, to be sure you just have to load the nki (or nkm) with 1.2b in it.


----------



## muziksculp

DANIELE said:


> My patches all have 1.2b after the instrument name, to be sure you just have to load the nki (or nkm) with 1.2b in it.


Thanks.

When I load the library, it comes up with the older v 1.2 patches, not the v 1.2 b, I guess I will just have to manually load the v 1.2 b patches which I do have on the library drive. So all this time I have not been using v 1.2 b


----------



## Bollen

philippe goi said:


> New contribution ,the theme of Schindler’s list , solo strings , pianoteq Harp .
> Mixing parallax audio virtual sound stage , altiverb ir impulse .
> View attachment Schindler 'List SampleModeling Strings.mp4


Man that's nice, just one little tip though: violins can only play about 4 notes on the same string before they have to change position or string (3 on the cello). So for more realism and phrasing avoid overlapped notes for more than 4 (exceptionally 5) in a row...


----------



## muziksculp

OK, I just loaded the v 1.2b into my Sample Modeling Solo & Ens. Template, and I could hear a very noticeable sonic improvement, and also in playability right away. They sound amazing ! 

It's like I am using a new, better sounding library. 

Can't wait to see what the next update will improve.


----------



## Vardaro

Bollen said:


> Man that's nice, just one little tip though: violins can only play about 4 notes on the same string before they have to change position or string (3 on the cello). So for more realism and phrasing avoid overlapped notes for more than 4 (exceptionally 5) in a row...


That is absolutely true, but we violinists etc spend hours smoothing out our leaps and hops.
The transitions are done lightly but quickly, and the fingers pop, rather than sink, onto the strings.


----------



## muziksculp

philippe goi said:


> New contribution ,the theme of Schindler’s list , solo strings , pianoteq Harp .
> Mixing parallax audio virtual sound stage , altiverb ir impulse .
> View attachment Schindler 'List SampleModeling Strings.mp4


Always great to listen to, and watch you SM demos. Thanks for sharing.

A few comments: 

I find the opening phrase a bit odd sounding, not sure why. But sound too artificial to my ears. The opening few notes lack realism. 

I also feel the track could use a bit more reverb, or depth, it sounds too flat, and dry. Maybe it's just me, but that's how it comes across. So, it's more of a mixing detail. Your performance of the instruments was very good, i.e. Dynamics, and playing. Well Done !


----------



## Bollen

Vardaro said:


> That is absolutely true, but we violinists etc spend hours smoothing out our leaps and hops.
> The transitions are done lightly but quickly, and the fingers pop, rather than sink, onto the strings.


Although that is absolutely true, you still don't hear the same sound as a fingered legato or crossed strings for that matter. All things this fabulous library can do and should be taken advantage of... My 2p.


----------



## clisma

muziksculp said:


> OK, I just loaded the v 1.2b into my Sample Modeling Solo & Ens. Template, and I could hear a very noticeable sonic improvement, and also in playability right away. They sound amazing !
> 
> It's like I am using a new, better sounding library.
> 
> Can't wait to see what the next update will improve.


Wait, wasn't the 1.2b update only meant to fix the Pitch Bend issue? Are you saying that it does more to the tone and under the hood?

If so, I would update as well (haven't done so due to the hassle of porting my own presets over).


----------



## muziksculp

clisma said:


> Wait, wasn't the 1.2b update only meant to fix the Pitch Bend issue? Are you saying that it does more to the tone and under the hood?
> 
> If so, I would update as well (haven't done so due to the hassle of porting my own presets over).


I'm not sure what 1.2b fixed, or improved, but It surely sounds better than the version I was using.


----------



## muziksculp

I'm currently working on building a Sample Modeling Strings Template, which has both ensembles, and Solos, all tweaked to my taste, also using MIR-Pro, and Liquid-Sonics Cinematic Rooms Pro for the Reverb, and now that I'm using version 1.2b of the library, everything is sounding better than it has. 

Loving this library !


----------



## Katznegold

muziksculp said:


> I'm currently working on building a Sample Modeling Strings Template, which has both ensembles, and Solos, all tweaked to my taste, also using MIR-Pro, and Liquid-Sonics Cinematic Rooms Pro for the Reverb, and now that I'm using version 1.2b of the library, everything is sounding better than it has.
> 
> Loving this library !


Using MIR Pro is a game changer for me when working with samplemodeling instruments,
my setback in my template is making it less cpu intensive. I was able to get great result with heavy sculpting using a combination of plugins but they're taking too much processing...


----------



## muziksculp

Katznegold said:


> Using MIR Pro is a game changer for me when working with samplemodeling instruments,
> my setback in my template is making it less cpu intensive. I was able to get great result with heavy sculpting using a combination of plugins but they're taking too much processing...


Yes, I agree. MIR Pro is a game changer when working with Sample Modeling Instruments. I have been testing it with various venues, and the results are wonderful. Adding a bit of the venue sound, plus positioning the various sections in the hall. It's like I have a totally different library. 

Yes, I noticed the CPU hit when using it, I had to bump my RAM Buffer from 256 to 512 to not get pop-n-clicks in the audio. 

In addition to MIR-Pro, I initially was using Liquid-Sonics Cinematic Rooms Pro, but after experimenting with other logarithmic reverb options, I settled on using R4 by Exponential Audio (currently part of iZotope), for some reason it seems to give me the best results with Sample Modeling Instruments.


----------



## muziksculp

Hi,

I just wanted to add to my previous posts above, that the more I use this library, the more I'm impressed by what it can achieve, and how flexible it is. Comparing this library to any of my more traditional Strings Sample Libraries makes me appreciate the sculpting power, and how much more expressive I can get with SM-Solo & Ens. Strings compared to anything else I have. Legatos are smooth as silk, I don't need to apply any negative delay compensation like many other sample libraries, for legatos, shorts, ..etc. A big advantage over other traditional libraries.

I am so happy with this library, and very excited about Sample Modeling's next update.

I continue experimenting with acoustic treatments, I switched to using Fabfilter's Algorithmic Reverb Pro-R, and I like the way it is interacting with SM Strings, and MIR-Pro.

Carefully controlling The Timbral shaping parameters in real time, to get more colorful timbre, adds another dimension of realism to just using Dynamics, which is all automatable, and editable gives me lots of control over the sonic character.

Lots of details to discover, and they all contribute to the overall expressive, and realism aspects of these strings. I haven't messed around with any pitch related editing in real time, or dynamics to pitch, ..etc. to see what those offer.

Also Vibrato Amount, Speed, and Rate control is an extremely important detail that gives me lots of expressive control, which is usually missing in many traditional Sample Libraries.

Not having to use many Key-Switches is liberating, and very refreshing.

I will continue to post more feedback about Sample Modeling Solo & Ensemble Strings, including some audio demos.

I would love to hear more from users of this library, cool tips, experiences, and any other details that they wish to share about this library.

Cheers,
Muziksculp


----------



## molemac

Hi sorry if this has been discussed before but as an Ewi wind player and having used sample modeling brass a lot which do users her prefer and has the most realistic sound between sample modelling strings and the new Swam version ( and is that ensemble too )


----------



## mohsohsenshi

molemac said:


> Hi sorry if this has been discussed before but as an Ewi wind player and having used sample modeling brass a lot which do users her prefer and has the most realistic sound between sample modelling strings and the new Swam version ( and is that ensemble too )


You're right, it has been discussed before.
Sample modeling strings has a more natural tone in general. But AM's strings can sound very close to real player if you put a scary effort on editing/tweaking. It depends on different musical context and personal workflow. 
Let's see what Swam's new version (coming out in March) will bring to us.


----------



## Vardaro

In a mix, I find the AM violin often convincing, perhaps because a real violin is (can be..) already a well balanced, responsive instrument. But the viola and cello lack "grain" in their basic timbre, and in their attacks. Like furniture of streaked formica instead of photographed wood?


----------



## Bollen

I've said it before, but I'll say it again: SM, in the right hands, can sound as convincing as the real thing. AM will never sound realistic, but it's way, way, way more flexible! SM is limited to what they sampled, AM your imagination is the only limit....

Did I get the balance right?


----------



## muziksculp

Bollen said:


> I've said it before, but I'll say it again: SM, in the right hands, can sound as convincing as the real thing. AM will never sound realistic, but it's way, way, way more flexible! SM is limited to what they sampled, AM your imagination is the only limit....
> 
> Did I get the balance right?


AM Solo Strings will be getting a major update next month (Version 3). So, it might get quite a bit of improvements in the sound dept. in addition to a new GUI.

SM Solo & Ens. Strings is also expected to get an update, but not sure when. Hopefully soon.

Both of these libraries are outstanding, and as you said, in the right hands can sound very close to the real thing. Imagination is surely an important, and needed ingredient.


----------



## CT

Bollen said:


> I've said it before, but I'll say it again: SM, in the right hands, can sound as convincing as the real thing. AM will never sound realistic, but it's way, way, way more flexible! SM is limited to what they sampled, AM your imagination is the only limit....
> 
> Did I get the balance right?


Ok but whose hands are the right hands?!

This is what I was trying to find out in the bassoon thread. Where are the absolute top highlight examples of these in action, which aren't jazzy or focused on single instruments or small groups?


----------



## Bollen

Mike T said:


> Ok but whose hands are the right hands?!
> 
> This is what I was trying to find out in the bassoon thread. Where are the absolute top highlight examples of these in action, which aren't jazzy or focused on single instruments or small groups?


This is the one that convinced me, but there are others: https://vi-control.net/community/th...-ensemble-strings-released.84409/post-4568639


----------



## Jish

Bollen said:


> This is the one that convinced me, but there are others: https://vi-control.net/community/th...-ensemble-strings-released.84409/post-4568639


Exactly- between this one specifically, and numerous other Leandro Gardini clips, I just kind of came to the conclusion that you gotta have some Italian blood to make these strings sing: "_Let's kick it up a notch_!" "_Now I gotta do something nice for Johnny_!"

Some of those clips sound very good (to me) but outside of those, not too sure. Hope the update is great.


----------



## CT

Hmm... well I too have an Italian surname, but I think what I'm after is still not there. Don't mind me, I just have to check in every few years.


----------



## tabulius

Mike T said:


> Ok but whose hands are the right hands?!
> 
> This is what I was trying to find out in the bassoon thread. Where are the absolute top highlight examples of these in action, which aren't jazzy or focused on single instruments or small groups?







This guy is a SWAM genius.

EDIT: And yes, I know we were talking about SM strings, but this is a great example of how someone can get the most out of the instrument.


----------



## CT

Thanks, yeah I'm familiar with that guy.


----------



## Fa

tabulius said:


> This guy is a SWAM genius.
> 
> EDIT: And yes, I know we were talking about SM strings, but this is a great example of how someone can get the most out of the instrument.


Well, one of the most important challenges for the use of both the VI (SM and AM) is the interaction. Using a seaboard + leapmotion is a (pretty complex, slightly expensive, but not impossible) example of the right way.

To be fair it's also because otherwise the AM would really sound poor and not believable, missing the proper modulation of the physical-modeling-synth engine.

And to be even more fair, if you use the same amount of care and modulation in the SampleModeling solo strings, you can get even better result, due to the more natural/realistic sound base provided by the sampled sound and the AI scripting.


----------



## soPpypoPsy

tabulius said:


> This guy is a SWAM genius.
> 
> EDIT: And yes, I know we were talking about SM strings, but this is a great example of how someone can get the most out of the instrument.


Thank you for picking up my videos. 

In the past, I have uploaded an experimental video using SaE (SM) and Leap experimentally on Twitter, so I will introduce it. (I'm rather better at handling SWAM than SaE (SM), so it might seem unfair)


To be honest with the solo string Arco, I think it is more important in terms of expression to be able to properly manipulate the bow (detache) and pressure than the tone. In the future, SaE will be even more powerful as those features are updated.

I always think that it is just as important to spread more rational and appropriate playing methods as well as "intuitive", "wide range of expression", and "ready to use out of the box".


----------



## muziksculp

Hello @soPpypoPsy ,

Welcome to VI-C forum. Nice to see you here. 

I love watching your videos, especially the ones you are using Leap-Motion with SWAM Strings. 

I'm more into using Sample Modeling Solo & Ens. Strings right now, experimenting with them, and discovering lots of things on the way. I haven't tried using Leap-Motion with them yet, but I will see what it can offer. 

I look forward to see more of your great videos using SWAM Solo Strings, the new SWAM Solo Strings Version 3 will be released next month, which is not too far away. 

Q. Are you using any other controllers besides the Leap-Motion ? i.e. Breath Controllers ? or Seabord ? or ... ? 

Thanks,
Muziksculp


----------



## soPpypoPsy

muziksculp said:


> Hello @soPpypoPsy ,
> 
> Welcome to VI-C forum. Nice to see you here.
> 
> I love watching your videos, especially the ones you are using Leap-Motion with SWAM Strings.
> 
> I'm more into using Sample Modeling Solo & Ens. Strings right now, experimenting with them, and discovering lots of things on the way. I haven't tried using Leap-Motion with them yet, but I will see what it can offer.
> 
> I look forward to see more of your great videos using SWAM Solo Strings, the new SWAM Solo Strings Version 3 will be released next month, which is not too far away.
> 
> Q. Are you using any other controllers besides the Leap-Motion ? i.e. Breath Controllers ? or Seabord ? or ... ?
> 
> Thanks,
> Muziksculp


Nice to see you here too!

As for solos, I rarely use SaE because SWAM handles it the way I want it to.
However, the overtone function of the SaE ensemble patch is outstandingly excellent.
In the ensemble, unlike the solo, I think that any controller can be used as long as the expression and vibrato depth & speed can be controlled independently at the same time.

SWAM v3… Considering the policy of AM, I don't think that the ease of handling and the impression when it is taken out of the box will not change significantly, but I am very much looking forward to the long-awaited individual overtone function.I will post a video soon.

A. Currently, I use a combination of Leap Motion and Seaboard regardless of woodwind, brass or strings.
I also used a breath controller, but I used it less often because my mouth got tired. (Instead, I used the graph output by the breath controller as a reference for the Leap Motion sensitivity setting.)
The final result does not change without Seaboard, but the accuracy of each is improved by making the control method independent.


----------



## muziksculp

soPpypoPsy said:


> Nice to see you here too!
> 
> As for solos, I rarely use SaE because SWAM handles it the way I want it to.
> However, the overtone function of the SaE ensemble patch is outstandingly excellent.
> In the ensemble, unlike the solo, I think that any controller can be used as long as the expression and vibrato depth & speed can be controlled independently at the same time.
> 
> SWAM v3… Considering the policy of AM, I don't think that the ease of handling and the impression when it is taken out of the box will not change significantly, but I am very much looking forward to the long-awaited individual overtone function.I will post a video soon.
> 
> A. Currently, I use a combination of Leap Motion and Seaboard regardless of woodwind, brass or strings.
> I also used a breath controller, but I used it less often because my mouth got tired. (Instead, I used the graph output by the breath controller as a reference for the Leap Motion sensitivity setting.)
> The final result does not change without Seaboard, but the accuracy of each is improved by making the control method independent.


Thanks for the helpful feedback.

I don't have the Seabord, how useful has it been for you ?

By the way have you looked into using the *MidiPaw *Application , it is a free app. with Leap-Motion ?
http://www.midipaw.com/ 

I look forward to watch your SWAM Solo Strings Ver 3 video when Version 3 is out. I'm hoping they have improved it sonically as well in version 3.

Cheers,
Muziksculp


----------



## soPpypoPsy

muziksculp said:


> Thanks for the helpful feedback.
> 
> I don't have the Seabord, how useful has it been for you ?
> 
> By the way have you looked into using the *MidiPaw *Application , it is a free app. with Leap-Motion ?
> http://www.midipaw.com/
> 
> I look forward to watch your SWAM Solo Strings Ver 3 video when Version 3 is out. I'm hoping they have improved it sonically as well in version 3.
> 
> Cheers,
> Muziksculp


Seaboard was helpful, though is not mandatory. It just splits the burden of doing everything with the left hand.

It's not the way Seaboards is used like in the official demo, but I thought it was reasonable to assign the vibrato depth to aftertouch. This is to apply the appropriate vibrato after the finger touches the strings.
However, I think that the later LUMI was better because it requires some tips with a unique keyboard.

In the SaE performance video introduced earlier, Leap Motion is controlled with the left hand (Exp, Vib Dpt, Vib Rate), and a general keyboard is played with the right hand.
I look forward to the new parameters implemented in SaE in the future. (Especially pressure and stickiness)

I didn't know MidiPaw. Thanks for the useful information!


----------



## Trevor Meier

I'm wondering if anyone knows of an iOS app that could replicate the functionality of the Leap Motion? There's certainly enough AI power in the recent phones, plus the AR & camera depth APIs would make it relatively painless to create something similar?


----------



## Thorgod10

So at this point, I'm well convinced this library can do all but one CRUCIAL aspect of string vst usage:
Ensemble shorts. 

In this particular library, they seem to be quite limited to brush spiccato and mild staccatos, while other sample libraries are able to achieve that crisp, raw, tight-n'-powerful sound that is absolutely crucial in more aggressive productions. 

I only stress this because it is in fact, the only thing this library needs to make it a workhorse VST. 
I'll soon post an example that further illustrates where this falls short.


----------



## muziksculp

Thorgod10 said:


> So at this point, I'm well convinced this library can do all but one CRUCIAL aspect of string vst usage:
> Ensemble shorts.
> 
> In this particular library, they seem to be quite limited to brush spiccato and mild staccatos, while other sample libraries are able to achieve that crisp, raw, tight-n'-powerful sound that is absolutely crucial in more aggressive productions.
> 
> I only stress this because it is in fact, the only thing this library needs to make it a workhorse VST.
> I'll soon post an example that further illustrates where this falls short.


I agree. I would also add that I'm not very fond of the *Pizz. articulations* quality of SM S&ES. I wish they can be improved.


----------



## Markrs

Trevor Meier said:


> I'm wondering if anyone knows of an iOS app that could replicate the functionality of the Leap Motion? There's certainly enough AI power in the recent phones, plus the AR & camera depth APIs would make it relatively painless to create something similar?


Musikraken is very interesting and can do some of the things of Leap motion, some things of divisimate and sine things to route the midi through effects.









‎MusiKraken


‎MusiKraken is an Experimental MIDI Controller Construction Kit. Make music using your hands, face, voice or by rotating the device! Choose from several types of modules in the editor and connect the ports to create your own MIDI controller setup. Use device sensors like Touch, Accelerometer...



apps.apple.com










MusiKraken - New experimental MIDI Controller Construction Kit app


Hello all, I finally released the iOS version of my own MIDI Controller app today! It is called: MusiKraken. (Android version coming soon as well...). I originally made the app for myself, but then Covid-19 came along and I suddenly had a lot of time :-|. That is why I created a releasable...



vi-control.net


----------



## DANIELE

I'm becaming obsessed with this track, is someone able to replicate the thrills that you start listening to at 0:17. I love the ones that start at 0:20 in the violins but I'm not sure about the right technique, I know the strings begins as flautando, then thrills then the violins start to perform that figure. I think it is an appoggiatura (you use this word in english too, don't you?), am I right?



I think that SMS is able to perform those parts but I must try, is there any other out here that would like to try?


----------



## shawnsingh

DANIELE said:


> I'm becaming obsessed with this track, is someone able to replicate the thrills that you start listening to at 0:17. I love the ones that start at 0:20 in the violins but I'm not sure about the right technique, I know the strings begins as flautando, then thrills then the violins start to perform that figure. I think it is an appoggiatura (you use this word in english too, don't you?), am I right?
> 
> 
> 
> I think that SMS is able to perform those parts but I must try, is there any other out here that would like to try?



I think 0:17 is not flautando, but flageolet (i.e. harmonics) with a gliss legato transition between two notes.

I vaguely remember the term appoggiatura, so maybe it is used by western classical music in english, too? But anyway I had to look it up, google explained it as a grace note that starts on-the-beat instead of before-the-beat. Actually I think these are mordents, not appoggiatura. Specific mordent like D-E-D or Csharp-D-Csharp, and the octave below is just a gentle sfz on a trill.


----------



## DANIELE

shawnsingh said:


> I think 0:17 is not flautando, but flageolet (i.e. harmonics) with a gliss legato transition between two notes.
> 
> I vaguely remember the term appoggiatura, so maybe it is used by western classical music in english, too? But anyway I had to look it up, google explained it as a grace note that starts on-the-beat instead of before-the-beat. Actually I think these are mordents, not appoggiatura. Specific mordent like D-E-D or Csharp-D-Csharp, and the octave below is just a gentle sfz on a trill.


Yeah you are right, it is not flautando.

And it could be mordent yes, I didn't think about that. About the appoggiatura I could have used grace note instead anyway yes you are right about its definition. I remember I heard some master using the italian word in some english course.
I'll try as you said and I'll see what it came out from SMS. Thank you for your help, I was pretty much wrong in guessing everything.


----------



## Vardaro

Musicians use Italian terms in their own way!
E.g "detaché" (damn, that's French) for a violinist is not really detached, just re-bowed.
"Spiccato" has no real French translation (not refined enough?)
"Collé" (much nicer) has no Italian equivalent.
If Andante means moderate speed, Andantino means less moderate.
If Andante mean moving, Andantino means less moving.
Never mind German etc...


----------



## philippe goi

New Theme from " Schindler'List" version, more reverb, working on legato transitions, micro DECCA .
View attachment Schindler's List Samplemodeling STRINGS.mp4


----------



## Katznegold

Does anyone have a solution to dealing with the resonance? In violins for example, no matter how hard I try I can't get rid of the "first harmonics" between 200-800 hz. they're peaking like crazy, amplified by room reverbs and it's getting real frustrating... unless I completely lose the body I can't manage to tame them


----------



## companyofquail

Katznegold said:


> Does anyone have a solution to dealing with the resonance? In violins for example, no matter how hard I try I can't get rid of the "first harmonics" between 200-800 hz. they're peaking like crazy, amplified by room reverbs and it's getting real frustrating... unless I completely lose the body I can't manage to tame them


I don’t own this specific library so I can’t go in and give you a definitive trick but I can make a suggestion:
Have you tried using a de-esser that has threshold and frequency settings? Or a multiband compressor only in that range?


----------



## Katznegold

companyofquail said:


> I don’t own this specific library so I can’t go in and give you a definitive trick but I can make a suggestion:
> Have you tried using a de-esser that has threshold and frequency settings? Or a multiband compressor only in that range?



I tried with Sooth2 but couldn't get the result I want. Also trying with dynamic eq but either there's too much low resonance or the violin sound thin and synthetic.

#EDIT: talking about the ensemble patches


----------



## muziksculp

Katznegold said:


> Does anyone have a solution to dealing with the resonance? In violins for example, no matter how hard I try I can't get rid of the "first harmonics" between 200-800 hz. they're peaking like crazy, amplified by room reverbs and it's getting real frustrating... unless I completely lose the body I can't manage to tame them


Could you post an audio clip of the resonance you are hearing that bother you ?


----------



## Vardaro

Violins have thier stongest resonances at around middle C#/D, and open A440 or B;
then a tiresome peak around 1kHz. Without these, it won't sound like a violin!
Are there some similar peaks in your speakers/phones?


----------



## muziksculp

Here is a bit of experimentation with the sound of the SM *Solo Cello*, a very short lyrical style phrase, I used VSL MIR-Pro, and Liquid Sonics Seventh Heaven Reverb. Harpsichord is the Baroque CineHarpsichord.

This is (ver. 1) , I will post more versions so you can compare, and see how it can be improved further.

View attachment SM Solo Cello Test 4.mp3


*Version 1*


----------



## muziksculp

I will be posting a few versions of this experimental clip using variations of the Timbral Shaping settings.

Here is new version (ver. 2) with a different Timbral Shaping Settings. They play a huge role in shaping the timbre/character of the instruments. I personally like this version better than (ver. 1)

Notice how ver. 2 sound more like a nice, and realistic cello timbre, quite rich, and airy, and doesn't have any of the nasal quality audible in ver. 1

View attachment SM Solo Cello Test 5.mp3


*Version 2*


----------



## muziksculp

Here is the SM Solo Cello playing some arpeggiated chords. 

View attachment SM Solo Cello Arp.mp3


----------



## Thorgod10

muziksculp said:


> Here is the SM Solo Cello playing some arpeggiated chords.
> 
> View attachment SM Solo Cello Arp.mp3


As a string player, I winced. 

Any position alterations here?


----------



## muziksculp

Thorgod10 said:


> As a string player, I winced.
> 
> Any position alterations here?


No, just played in low/first position.


----------



## Vardaro

muziksculp said:


> No, just played in low/first position.


The attacks sound real, but _very_ close-miked, in a nice (and empty) room.
"Version 2" has a lovely warm tone, but with less equal intensity from note to note than Version 1 (on my equipment, at least). Real strings have a surprisingly uneven response, which can set off room resonances (real or fake).

Crudely speaking, the tiresome "nasality" is often a peak somewhere between 750 and 1500 Hz, while "projection" (the"singer's formant") is around 3 kHz: harsh at close range, but exciting at a distance.
"Airyness" can often come from either side of 6kHz.
The highest strings of cellos and violas are often (too) strident, and Giorgio has already sweetened these notes on the cello.


----------



## Bollen

muziksculp said:


> No, just played in low/first position.


I don't know about other cellists, but I can't reach the F#-A-E in 1st position...

Actually, after a few experiments, I was able to get a more realistic performance by using the Open String Keyswitch and then High position for the lower chords. This way you force the legato on the correct notes. Still, that E sounds particularly weird and synthetic, unlike most other notes on the instrument...


----------



## muziksculp

Bollen said:


> I don't know about other cellists, but I can't reach the F#-A-E in 1st position...
> 
> Actually, after a few experiments, I was able to get a more realistic performance by using the Open String Keyswitch and then High position for the lower chords. This way you force the legato on the correct notes. Still, that E sounds particularly weird and synthetic, unlike most other notes on the instrument...


@Bollen,

Thanks for the feedback. 

I didn't use the higher positions option via the key-switch, or the open string key-switch in this fast test track. 

Yes, possibly more realism can be obtained using the key-switches for high-position, and open-strings, but this was a rough, and fast test to see how the Solo Cello would sound playing arp'd chords.


----------



## Katznegold

Can keyswitches be moved? I want to program all the instruments to the same notes at the lowest register but it appears I can't...
If it actually isn't possible can we ask for this feature? It's pretty trivial imho. 

EDIT: also am I the only one getting really frustrated with the "latch" mode? having the same key activates and deactivates the articulation means every second playback it starts off and switches the other way around, and it's even more problematic when having several keyswitches if you interrupt the playback between them. 
I asked for a fix for this at the first version and didn't get any reply on that. feels like I was completely ignored.


----------



## shawnsingh

All in favor of addressing those problems... 

For the second problem, sounds like a third option would be necessary - "keyswitch mode" instead of "latch mode"


----------



## Vardaro

Bollen said:


> I don't know about other cellists, but I can't reach the F#-A-E in 1st position...


To "fool" real players, one would have to sample every note and transition up each string, as in certain guitar VI's.
The low/high simplification is a compromise good enough for many non players ..


----------



## Bollen

Vardaro said:


> To "fool" real players, one would have to sample every note and transition up each string, as in certain guitar VI's.
> The low/high simplification is a compromise good enough for many non players ..


Agreed, but also good enough for me! 



Katznegold said:


> Can keyswitches be moved? I want to program all the instruments to the same notes at the lowest register but it appears I can't...
> If it actually isn't possible can we ask for this feature? It's pretty trivial imho.
> 
> EDIT: also am I the only one getting really frustrated with the "latch" mode? having the same key activates and deactivates the articulation means every second playback it starts off and switches the other way around, and it's even more problematic when having several keyswitches if you interrupt the playback between them.
> I asked for a fix for this at the first version and didn't get any reply on that. feels like I was completely ignored.


You could use a Multiscript to set them all to be the same, like this one: https://cinesamples.com/product/cinemap

Also, isn't the latch simply triggered by velocity? Lower velocities behave normal... Again a MS might solve the issue by filtering higher velocites for the specific notes.


----------



## shawnsingh

Vardaro said:


> To "fool" real players, one would have to sample every note and transition up each string, as in certain guitar VI's.
> The low/high simplification is a compromise good enough for many non players ..





Bollen said:


> Agreed, but also good enough for me!


Personally, I would really love to have the most realistic instrument possible that would convince pros of the instrument, even if I don't know the instrument and wouldn't realize the difference. I think actually the difference would be there, not necessarily as in "as a performer, I can tell this legato transition was wrong" but rather "as a listener, there's something about it that just makes sense and feels correct the way i'm subconsciously familiar with".

And, I do believe it's possible with fingering simulations, scripting, the appropriate abstractions provided for users to control, and the right foundation of sampling or modeling. On the Infinite Series thread, there was recently a lot of discussion about the "next gen" virtual instrument control scheme that can be both simple and still extremely expressive, and some ideas about how a virtual instrument could support that scheme. I had added my take on it in this ridiculously verbose post, but other posts just around those few days were all very great to think over.


----------



## philippe goi

Test MidiPaw + leap Motion + TEControl Breath Controller ( solo cello
View attachment Samplemodeling solo cello and MidiPaw TEST.mp4
samplemodeling Strings )


----------



## Katznegold

Bollen said:


> You could use a Multiscript to set them all to be the same, like this one: https://cinesamples.com/product/cinemap
> 
> Also, isn't the latch simply triggered by velocity? Lower velocities behave normal... Again a MS might solve the issue by filtering higher velocites for the specific notes.


Thanks! I wasn't familiar with this, looks like it'll do for now.
The lower velocity functions as a temporary keyswitch - as long as it's pressed (in low velocity) the articulation is active, when you let go it goes back.


----------



## Bollen

Katznegold said:


> The lower velocity functions as a temporary keyswitch - as long as it's pressed (in low velocity) the articulation is active, when you let go it goes back.


Precisely, wasn't that what you were looking for?


----------



## Katznegold

Bollen said:


> Precisely, wasn't that what you were looking for?


No, I don't want to have to keep the key pressed. normally a keyswitch will switch to the articulation and not revert back, you'll have a different key for legato\arco. it shouldn't be an 'on\off' switch, just 'on'


----------



## Bollen

Katznegold said:


> No, I don't want to have to keep the key pressed. normally a keyswitch will switch to the articulation and not revert back, you'll have a different key for legato\arco. it shouldn't be an 'on\off' switch, just 'on'


Yes but in that case if you hit the Keyswitch hard it'll stay on... I don't get it, you have both options...🤔


----------



## Katznegold

Bollen said:


> Yes but in that case if you hit the Keyswitch hard it'll stay on... I don't get it, you have both options...🤔


until it's pressed again, and say I have a keyswitch for pizz written and I'll press play- it'll turn on and everything is fine, but SECOND time I'll press play it'll be backwards


----------



## Bollen

Katznegold said:


> until it's pressed again, and say I have a keyswitch for pizz written and I'll press play- it'll turn on and everything is fine, but SECOND time I'll press play it'll be backwards


I see... That's not happening on my end for some reason. Once I press hard on the pizz keyswitch it stays on until I press another one. Weird...


----------



## shawnsingh

Bollen said:


> I see... That's not happening on my end for some reason. Once I press hard on the pizz keyswitch it stays on until I press another one. Weird...


I think the problem is the "toggle" behavior when pressing the same keyswitch (latch) twice. In most keyswitching systems, pressing twice will be the same as pressing once, either way that articulation is activated. But if it toggles, then the second one will turn off that articulation and go back to default. I can completely see how this can be a problem with recorded midi been performance and playing back only a section of it. Then every second playback would turn off the articulation instead of activating it.

So I think there should be three modes - temporary, latch, and "keyswitch"


----------



## muziksculp

shawnsingh said:


> So I think there should be three modes - temporary, latch, and "keyswitch"


That would be very handy, and makes sense to have. But.. Will it be one of the features of the upcoming update ?


----------



## shawnsingh

muziksculp said:


> That would be very handy, and makes sense to have. But.. Will it be one of the features of the upcoming update ?


I have no idea  If this is a new feature request, I assume it may need to wait for another update...


----------



## muziksculp

Hi,

I'm still experimenting with SM Solo & Ens. Strings, and enjoying my time using them. 

One of my goals is to create my own custom Baroque-Period sounding Strings Orchestra, using this library. 

Given that non of the Sample Developers have offered such a strings library, I decided it's not a bad idea to try to make my own, using this library, since it offers lots of flexibility that could make this possible. 

I just wanted to share this with you. 

Cheers,
Muziksculp


----------



## PerryD

The issue of latching keyswitches... It has been resolved that velocity controls the state of a keyswitch being momentary or active, correct? That is the way it is working for me. This is from the manual: _Most of the Keyswitches can be used in two modes: “momentary” and “latch”. Pressing a KS with low velocity (>86) enters the “momentary” mode. That means that the KS is active as long as you keep it pressed. Pressing the KS briefly with high velocity (>86) activates the “latch” mode: the KS remains active till it ́s pressed again (with any velocity).If you get lost and want to quickly return back to the default mode of the instrument, press briefly lower C in the KS area. A "panic" complete reset is obtained by simultaneously pressing 3 or more keyswitches._


----------



## Katznegold

PerryD said:


> The issue of latching keyswitches... It has been resolved that velocity controls the state of a keyswitch being momentary or active, correct? That is the way it is working for me. This is from the manual: _Most of the Keyswitches can be used in two modes: “momentary” and “latch”. Pressing a KS with low velocity (>86) enters the “momentary” mode. That means that the KS is active as long as you keep it pressed. Pressing the KS briefly with high velocity (>86) activates the “latch” mode: the KS remains active till it ́s pressed again (with any velocity).If you get lost and want to quickly return back to the default mode of the instrument, press briefly lower C in the KS area. A "panic" complete reset is obtained by simultaneously pressing 3 or more keyswitches._


"till it's pressed again" is the problem part...


----------



## PerryD

Katznegold said:


> "till it's pressed again" is the problem part...


What about using the C keyswitch to reset it?


----------



## shawnsingh

That only works if the region you're trying to play back starts with that reset signal.


----------



## muziksculp

Anyone know if the Update will be released this month ?


----------



## Bollen

shawnsingh said:


> I think the problem is the "toggle" behavior when pressing the same keyswitch (latch) twice. In most keyswitching systems, pressing twice will be the same as pressing once, either way that articulation is activated. But if it toggles, then the second one will turn off that articulation and go back to default. I can completely see how this can be a problem with recorded midi been performance and playing back only a section of it. Then every second playback would turn off the articulation instead of activating it.
> 
> So I think there should be three modes - temporary, latch, and "keyswitch"


Gotcha! I have several libraries that do this so I've become accustomed to adding a reset after the "zone" in question. It was pretty annoying at first, but I'm used to it by now...

note: I mostly work in notation where these things are less of an issue.


----------



## Trevor Meier

Over on the Chris Hein tips & tricks thread (hi @muziksculp !) one of the explorations is about repeated-note legato, a lá Philip Glass:



Dan Light said:


> Anyone got a good workflow for getting the kind of legato ostinatos found in a piece like this?



Does anyone have any samples/examples/demos of this playing style using Samplemodeling Solo & Ensemble Strings? Or perhaps willing to plug in some midi to see how it performs?


----------



## robgb

Trevor Meier said:


> Over on the Chris Hein tips & tricks thread (hi @muziksculp !) one of the explorations is about repeated-note legato, a lá Philip Glass:
> 
> 
> Does anyone have any samples/examples/demos of this playing style using Samplemodeling Solo & Ensemble Strings? Or perhaps willing to plug in some midi to see how it performs?


I played this by hand, so it's a little sloppy, but it should give you a brief idea.


View attachment SM SOLO&ENSEMBLE STRINGS - REPEATED NOTE LEGATO.mp3


----------



## Trevor Meier

robgb said:


> I played this by hand, so it's a little sloppy, but it should give you a brief idea.
> 
> 
> View attachment SM SOLO&ENSEMBLE STRINGS - REPEATED NOTE LEGATO.mp3


Thanks! That's helpful. How has your experience with the library been? In general how is it with repetitive patterns like this?


----------



## robgb

Trevor Meier said:


> Thanks! That's helpful. How has your experience with the library been? In general how is it with repetitive patterns like this?


I love this library. Here's my review:


----------



## Trevor Meier

robgb said:


> I love this library. Here's my review:



Yes! I've watched it recently - one of the reasons I'm interested in the library. 

I'm not sure what style you prefer to write in, but if you've done any highly repetitive pieces I'd be interested to know your impressions.


----------



## DANIELE

Here some tracks full of repetitive figures where I used SM Strings if it can help you:







There are other tracks but I don't want to spam too much. I hope it helps.


----------



## robgb

Trevor Meier said:


> Yes! I've watched it recently - one of the reasons I'm interested in the library.
> 
> I'm not sure what style you prefer to write in, but if you've done any highly repetitive pieces I'd be interested to know your impressions.


Not really my thing, but this library is really versatile.


----------



## Piotrek K.

robgb said:


> I love this library. Here's my review:



Sorry, but is this really out of the box sound with only 2 controllers? Because it sounds wonderful. I'm asking because SM is widely recognized as "tweak till you die and it will still suck unless you are Leandro Gardini" (my interpretation of multiple opinions from web).


----------



## robgb

Piotrek K. said:


> Sorry, but is this really out of the box sound with only 2 controllers? Because it sounds wonderful. I'm asking because SM is widely recognized as "tweak till you die and it will still suck unless you are Leandro Gardini" (my interpretation of multiple opinions from web).


I'm using an xy pad with cc1 and cc11. Dynamics and vibrato. There are multiple parameters you can tweak to make it sound even better.


----------



## CT

Rob, I like the sound you're getting out of the solo violin. My main sonic complaints (wow who would have thought I'd have those!) seem more limited to the ensembles now. That "stacked" effect is just glaring. It's getting closer for me though....


----------



## robgb

Mike T said:


> Rob, I like the sound you're getting out of the solo violin. My main sonic complaints (wow who would have thought I'd have those!) seem more limited to the ensembles now. That "stacked" effect is just glaring. It's getting closer for me though....


They have worked to improve this in the lastest version 1.2b and it sounds even better. It's my understanding that they have further innovative improvements planned for future updates.


----------



## PerryD

OK, It's not Beethoven. I do love playing S&ES with a breath controller though. I know strings don't "breathe" but I feel like phrasing comes easier for me with a breath controller. No Keyswitches!


----------



## Bruhelius

I was able to add some "breath" by mixing in an automated white and pink noise generator with appropriate filters set up in reaper (one unique model for each string section). Ultimately, you need an additional noise factor when working with such physical models (or hybrid physical/sample to be precise). This is also why people also like to mix in room noise or John Cage etc.


----------



## muziksculp

Bruhelius said:


> I was able to add some "breath" by mixing in an automated white and pink noise generator with appropriate filters set up in reaper (one unique model for each string section). Ultimately, you need an additional noise factor when working with such physical models (or hybrid physical/sample to be precise). This is also why people also like to mix in room noise or John Cage etc.


Interesting. 

Are you adding the noise to each section of the strings to simulate the natural noise of the recording hall to add to the realism ? or are you referring to doing something else with the addition of noise ?


----------



## Bruhelius

muziksculp said:


> Interesting.
> 
> Are you adding the noise to each section of the strings to simulate the natural noise of the recording hall to add to the realism ? or are you referring to doing something else with the addition of noise ?


I actually set up the noise to mimic the sound of breathing musicians. I can dial that in via CC or volume automation. But I also automated parts of the filter. Take a deep breath through your nose and listen to the frequencies. Now picture the first chairs making the same sort of sounds while playing. There you have some added realism. There is no such thing as a "clean" string section. You hear a lot of breathing noises in the Daft Punk soundtrack of Tron.


----------



## muziksculp

Bruhelius said:


> I actually set up the noise to mimic the sound of breathing musicians. I can dial that in via CC or volume automation. But I also automated parts of the filter. Take a deep breath through your nose and listen to the frequencies. Now picture the first chairs making the same sort of sounds while playing. There you have some added realism. There is no such thing as a "clean" string section. You hear a lot of breathing noises in the Daft Punk soundtrack of Tron.


I see. So, for an ultra realistic string performance, you will also need some coughing, and sneezing string players. 

Just kidding.


----------



## Saxer

Bruhelius said:


> I actually set up the noise to mimic the sound of breathing musicians.


I tried that by simply mic-recording myself using my wind-controller as an extra audio layer. It worked well and I could actually convince someone by sending him a dry Audiomodeling clarinet solo track. The wind-controller also makes some key noise so it sounds like a close miked audio recording. But I don't think it's worth the effort in dense arrangements.


----------



## Thorgod10

Mike T said:


> Rob, I like the sound you're getting out of the solo violin. My main sonic complaints (wow who would have thought I'd have those!) seem more limited to the ensembles now. That "stacked" effect is just glaring. It's getting closer for me though....


Just to echo and confirm, it is well established multiple facets of the ensembles fall short in compared to the solo instruments.
This include issues such as layering inconsistencies and shorts falling well.....short. 
Sit tight for now and enjoy the solo instruments, great things will follow in the future


----------



## muziksculp

Thorgod10 said:


> Just to echo and confirm, it is well established multiple facets of the ensembles fall short in compared to the solo instruments.
> This include issues such as layering inconsistencies and shorts falling well.....short.
> Sit tight for now and enjoy the solo instruments, great things will follow in the future


I wonder if the next update will improve the Ensemble Strings ? Also hope that the next update is not too far away.


----------



## DANIELE

muziksculp said:


> I wonder if the next update will improve the Ensemble Strings ? Also hope that the next update is not too far away.


Yeah I hope it too, I'm waiting for this to write another track.


----------



## Trevor Meier

As a new owner, my biggest struggle is dialing in the tone. The cello and bass in particular are difficult to find a pleasing tone with. The bass only has the single impulse response, and it’s a very bass-heavy sound without much definition. All of the cello IRs to me have exceptionally strong resonances that are difficult to tame.

I’m wondering if others could share what settings they use for getting a good tone? I’m already using external ER and reverb plugins. I’m more interested in how to get the basic tone of the instruments (both solo and ensemble) to behave in a musical way.


----------



## muziksculp

Trevor Meier said:


> As a new owner, my biggest struggle is dialing in the tone. The cello and bass in particular are difficult to find a pleasing tone with. The bass only has the single impulse response, and it’s a very bass-heavy sound without much definition. All of the cello IRs to me have exceptionally strong resonances that are difficult to tame.
> 
> I’m wondering if others could share what settings they use for getting a good tone? I’m already using external ER and reverb plugins. I’m more interested in how to get the basic tone of the instruments (both solo and ensemble) to behave in a musical way.


Timbral-Shaping is your friend for improving the tone/timbre of the strings, both Solo & Ensemble.

There is an earlier post about this on this thread.


----------



## muziksculp

@Trevor Meier 

Here is the Timbral-Shaping related post I was referring to, continue reading the following posts. 

https://vi-control.net/community/th...-ensemble-strings-released.84409/post-4735512


----------



## Vardaro

@ Trevor Meier

Real cellos (and violas and violins) have very marked resonances when heard close, which then give them their character at a distance.
I'm no help at all, since I like their tone already,.. but I'm not sure that the "timbral shaping " is the answer, since it modifies the overtone balance of each note, rather than the formants through which these frequencies pass. I would rather play around with early reflections and EQ.

The Timbral Shaping corresponds more to playing nearer to, or farther from, the bridge,
or using a different type of string. It might help your basses to get more punch, though.

Edit: So, for metallic tone, Timbral Shaping; for nasality, honking or squealing, EQ and IR.
Other Edit: Version 1.1 had already sweetened the high string of the cello.


----------



## Thorgod10

Ok....Pass # 1
Practicing on solo cello, playing some freeform Seitz in C Minor.
Some aggressive multiband and surgical EQ is definitely required, but if anyone likes how the solo cello is sounding here, I'll post my build 
(Don't mind the heavy reverb )


----------



## muziksculp

Thorgod10 said:


> Ok....Pass # 1
> Practicing on solo cello, playing some freeform Seitz in C Minor.
> Some aggressive multiband and surgical EQ is definitely required, but if anyone likes how the solo cello is sounding here, I'll post my build
> (Don't mind the heavy reverb )



Interesting how different one can make the SM Solo Strings sound. From aggressive, edgy to delicate, and smooth. 

Thanks for sharing. 

Here is a simple solo Cello phrase that has kind of the opposite characteristics to your version.  

View attachment SM Solo Cello Test 4.mp3


----------



## robgb

Bruhelius said:


> I actually set up the noise to mimic the sound of breathing musicians. I can dial that in via CC or volume automation. But I also automated parts of the filter. Take a deep breath through your nose and listen to the frequencies. Now picture the first chairs making the same sort of sounds while playing. There you have some added realism. There is no such thing as a "clean" string section. You hear a lot of breathing noises in the Daft Punk soundtrack of Tron.


You guys have too much time on your hands.


----------



## Thorgod10

muziksculp said:


> Interesting how different one can make the SM Solo Strings sound. From aggressive, edgy to delicate, and smooth.
> 
> Thanks for sharing.
> 
> Here is a simple solo Cello phrase that has kind of the opposite characteristics to your version.
> 
> View attachment SM Solo Cello Test 4.mp3


As a strings player by career, this demo greatly pleases me 
And yes, the goal of my demo was to show how well the cello works with applied reverb, and that its quite easy to tone down problem frequencies.
I purposely played this at max dynamics so that said frequencies would surface, but as we see here below, it's quite easy to remove and dial down without issues. I will again say, if the ensemble shorts are improved, this will easily be my main library for just about everything


----------



## DANIELE

Thorgod10 said:


> As a strings player by career, this demo greatly pleases me
> And yes, the goal of my demo was to show how well the cello works with applied reverb, and that its quite easy to tone down problem frequencies.
> I purposely played this at max dynamics so that said frequencies would surface, but as we see here below, it's quite easy to remove and dial down without issues. I will again say, if the ensemble shorts are improved, this will easily be my main library for just about everything


About the short I'm actually using v1.1 for them and v1.2b for the rest. The shorts are better in v1.1 but for the rest v1.2b is better, I'm waiting for the next update to see what SM will bring to the table.


----------



## Thorgod10

DANIELE said:


> About the short I'm actually using v1.1 for them and v1.2b for the rest. The shorts are better in v1.1 but for the rest v1.2b is better, I'm waiting for the next update to see what SM will bring to the table.


Ok this interests me, Is there any audio available of this, or any area to get the v1.1?


----------



## DANIELE

Thorgod10 said:


> Ok this interests me, Is there any audio available of this, or any area to get the v1.1?


Here's a test I did a while ago: https://vi-control.net/community/th...-ensemble-strings-released.84409/post-4660620

About the v1.1 I think you should ask to SM itself, maybe they can provide you with it. I have it because I bought SM Strings from the beginning.

I hope it is useful.


----------



## Fa

Thorgod10 said:


> Ok this interests me, Is there any audio available of this, or any area to get the v1.1?


Not sure about how to source v1.1 and if it's really better in shorts (perhaps is more a matter of spread or concentrated attacks, but it's pretty relative to context and and phrase). But I have an important recommendation:

- to group several articulations and expressions in one playable patch, some functions are not 100% evident or self explanatory, and the user has to take the time of experiment and learn some hidden features and tricks (reading the manual helps...  ).

to make aggressive attacks you must follow some rules:
- cc11 has to be close to the maximum to get the attack sound loud

- you may (I would say you must) shape at your will the envelope of cc11 to get your dynamic intent (e.g. from a brutal strappato to a sforzato down to a forte-piano etc.)

- to get the pure sound of a staccato you have to play/write a very short (shortest playable or pretty short in piano-roll editor) and maximum velocity note (I recommend >110). This will engage the staccato script.

- you may modulate the attack sound, shape and resonance using cc38 (attack noise type and strenght) and cc27 (release time for ring duration).

With the combination of the controls above, you may already shape a pretty large and convincing set of shorts and staccatos/spiccatos/marcatos to your taste and your musical intention.

Yes the update (not coming soon, but hopefully not late as well  ) will introduce some further improvements on this side as well. But you may start getting the best from the actual version now...


----------



## Fa

DANIELE said:


> Here's a test I did a while ago: https://vi-control.net/community/th...-ensemble-strings-released.84409/post-4660620
> 
> About the v1.1 I think you should ask to SM itself, maybe they can provide you with it. I have it because I bought SM Strings from the beginning.
> 
> I hope it is useful.


...and your Epic track with bass staccatos, was also a very impressive example of good shorts, Daniele!


----------



## Katznegold

Fa said:


> Not sure about how to source v1.1 and if it's really better in shorts (perhaps is more a matter of spread or concentrated attacks, but it's pretty relative to context and and phrase). But I have an important recommendation:
> 
> - to group several articulations and expressions in one playable patch, some functions are not 100% evident or self explanatory, and the user has to take the time of experiment and learn some hidden features and tricks (reading the manual helps...  ).
> 
> to make aggressive attacks you must follow some rules:
> - cc11 has to be close to the maximum to get the attack sound loud
> 
> - you may (I would say you must) shape at your will the envelope of cc11 to get your dynamic intent (e.g. from a brutal strappato to a sforzato down to a forte-piano etc.)
> 
> - to get the pure sound of a staccato you have to play/write a very short (shortest playable or pretty short in piano-roll editor) and maximum velocity note (I recommend >110). This will engage the staccato script.
> 
> - you may modulate the attack sound, shape and resonance using cc38 (attack noise type and strenght) and cc27 (release time for ring duration).
> 
> With the combination of the controls above, you may already shape a pretty large and convincing set of shorts and staccatos/spiccatos/marcatos to your taste and your musical intention.
> 
> Yes the update (not coming soon, but hopefully not late as well  ) will introduce some further improvements on this side as well. But you may start getting the best from the actual version now...


any idea if the update will feature improvements in cpu performance?


----------



## Thorgod10

Fa said:


> Not sure about how to source v1.1 and if it's really better in shorts (perhaps is more a matter of spread or concentrated attacks, but it's pretty relative to context and and phrase). But I have an important recommendation:
> 
> - to group several articulations and expressions in one playable patch, some functions are not 100% evident or self explanatory, and the user has to take the time of experiment and learn some hidden features and tricks (reading the manual helps...  ).
> 
> to make aggressive attacks you must follow some rules:
> - cc11 has to be close to the maximum to get the attack sound loud
> 
> - you may (I would say you must) shape at your will the envelope of cc11 to get your dynamic intent (e.g. from a brutal strappato to a sforzato down to a forte-piano etc.)
> 
> - to get the pure sound of a staccato you have to play/write a very short (shortest playable or pretty short in piano-roll editor) and maximum velocity note (I recommend >110). This will engage the staccato script.
> 
> - you may modulate the attack sound, shape and resonance using cc38 (attack noise type and strenght) and cc27 (release time for ring duration).
> 
> With the combination of the controls above, you may already shape a pretty large and convincing set of shorts and staccatos/spiccatos/marcatos to your taste and your musical intention.
> 
> Yes the update (not coming soon, but hopefully not late as well  ) will introduce some further improvements on this side as well. But you may start getting the best from the actual version now...


Already have done all of these, it's not that the shorts are BAD, oh nonono.
I would just like them to COMPETE with the likes of something like CSS, so it can be my all purpose library and first go to for everything.
With its legato and vibrato control, it is soooo close to being that "do-it-all" library that we would dream of years ago. 

In other words,
the shorts are good, but are better suited for a classical context...but with some love, could have all purpose short, that could be COMPETITIVE (not just good) in other genres.


----------



## Vardaro

Attacks? I find the temporal "spread" of v1.2 to be more realistic, but I still have the v1.1 ensemble instruments.
Is it possible/legal to copy them for someone who only has v1.2?


----------



## justthere

Vardaro said:


> Attacks? I find the temporal "spread" of v1.2 to be more realistic, but I still have the v1.1 ensemble instruments.
> Is it possible/legal to copy them for someone who only has v1.2?


They can’t ask the kind people at SM to send it to them?


----------



## irielen

I really love the violin from the demos and I am impressed by the sound, but I am unsure about the tone of the cello.. there is something that does not feel right in the Humoresque demo on the SM website, especially in the longer notes with vibrato.

The cello in the demo by muziksculp sounds better to me, and I would really like to hear some more convincing demos! I also hope we'll see some further improvements to the cello in the next update, I would definitely buy these strings then!


----------



## Thorgod10

irielen said:


> I really love the violin from the demos and I am impressed by the sound, but I am unsure about the tone of the cello.. there is something that does not feel right in the Humoresque demo on the SM website, especially in the longer notes with vibrato.
> 
> The cello in the demo by muziksculp sounds better to me, and I would really like to hear some more convincing demos! I also hope we'll see some further improvements to the cello in the next update, I would definitely buy these strings then!


Not just you.
The solo cello has some untamed, metallic qualities that take quite a bit of work.
In muziks demo, he does show that one can make it pretty tame if you play a more tame style, less vibrato, and in my demo, I essentially blast up the dynamics so the more unpleasant qualities become more apparent...and this is AFTER using multiband compression, EQ, and timbral shaping.


----------



## Vardaro

Real cello tone is rich in harmonics and body resonances which can be demanding of speakers and phones...

The examples above show that SM's Timbral Shaping can imitate gut strings, and that EQ and compression can imitate the honky resonances of a cheap plywood cello!
I think SM is doing rather well.....


----------



## RogiervG

philippe goi said:


> New Theme from " Schindler'List" version, more reverb, working on legato transitions, micro DECCA .
> View attachment Schindler's List Samplemodeling STRINGS.mp4


I sounds rushed.. will quite good though (violin)


----------



## Woodie1972

I've taken the plunge as well and bought the SM strings. I'm impressed by the playability, which I read about already, but you can only know if it's true if you try it out yourself.
Only thing I think could be improved is the sound of the celli, but there's enough said about that in this thread. Luckily I found the posts of Muziksculp and Shawnsingh about how they managed with timbral shaping and other settings to get rid of the buzzing/metal sound in the cello ensemble. I will try it out soon, hopefully this will help too improve it to my taste as well.
I don't know if the update will address this, we'll see. For now it works very well combined with Aaron Venture brass and woodwinds.


----------



## Vardaro

I presume we can save our customised instuments and multis, and even share them..


----------



## Thorgod10

You can, yes.
Very easy if you use Ableton.


----------



## Fa

irielen said:


> I would really like to hear some more convincing demos! I also hope we'll see some further improvements to the cello in the next update, I would definitely buy these strings then!


You will. (...hear, see, and hopefully buy  )


----------



## DANIELE

Fa said:


> You will. (...hear, see, and hopefully buy  )


When when when when when when when?

When?


----------



## Fa

DANIELE said:


> When when when when when when when?
> 
> When?


LOL hopefully not too late. But I would never start a new HOOPUS thread... 

Work to do is still a lot, that's the only thing that I know. But so far results sound pretty promising, that's why I'm pretty positive on the topic. I suppose the developers will disclose more, as soon as they will be in a good position for doing it.


----------



## philippe goi

Small improv with the solo violin and MidiPaw , fantastic sensations with a lot of expressiveness!
View attachment Samplemodeling solo violin and MidiPaw Impro.mp4


----------



## Trevor Meier

philippe goi said:


> Small improv with the solo violin and MidiPaw , fantastic sensations with a lot of expressiveness!
> View attachment Samplemodeling solo violin and MidiPaw Impro.mp4


Excellent!

Do any folks use the Leap Motion with macOS? What’s the recommended MIDI CC converter tool?


----------



## muziksculp

Trevor Meier said:


> What’s the recommended MIDI CC converter tool?


MIDIPaw. Great application to be used with Leap Motion.  

I use Windows 10.


----------



## Fa

Trevor Meier said:


> Excellent!
> 
> Do any folks use the Leap Motion with macOS? What’s the recommended MIDI CC converter tool?


I used to... but it had some sensitivity and light interference problems. so I stopped. Now after long time and some system updates, it should be time to try again... let's see if it got improved!


----------



## Trevor Meier

muziksculp said:


> MIDIPaw. Great application to be used with Leap Motion.
> 
> I use Windows 10.


MIDIPaw is Windows only, though right? Is there a Mac equivalent?


----------



## philippe goi

MidiPaw only for Windows , for MAC you can use Geco , it has become free it seems to me . http://uwyn.com/geco/


----------



## chapbot

This sounds better than the new AM violin to me.


----------



## justthere

philippe goi said:


> MidiPaw only for Windows , for MAC you can use Geco , it has become free it seems to me . http://uwyn.com/geco/


Glover also works, though it’s £119 I think. Not that it shouldn’t cost something - and it seems to handle scaling physical ranges better than Geco does. Because it’s designed predominantly to support the glove controller I found its implementation a little wonky - but it did work. Seems like Geko is more specific as far as some hand motions go, but it’s free (read:unsupported further).


----------



## Katznegold

philippe goi said:


> MidiPaw only for Windows , for MAC you can use Geco , it has become free it seems to me . http://uwyn.com/geco/


MidiPaw is brilliant. Phillip do you mind sharing your preset? here's mine


----------



## philippe goi

Hello! Here is my MidiPaw setting.
Yes really musical with a little training , here is also an improv with MidiPaw with the solo violin , interpretation in real time .


----------



## muziksculp

So, can we expect Sample Modeling to release an update for Solo & Ens. Strings during June ?


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

muziksculp said:


> So, can we expect Sample Modeling to release an update for Solo & Ens. Strings during June ?


No, Musiksculp, but you may expect a free upgrade later on.


----------



## justthere

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> No, Musiksculp, but you may expect a free upgrade later on.


Thanks, Giorgio - and thanks for your hard work on these instruments! I know this has been a difficult time for all developers. Here’s my wish for a rapid recovery period - and also a modeled duduk. Those other guys aren’t on it, and I like the sound of your process much better. And possibly before that, an option for even larger ensembles? (And ensemble brass pls?)


----------



## muziksculp

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> No, Musiksculp, but you may expect a free upgrade later on.


Hi @Giorgio Tommasini ,

Thanks for the feedback. 

Later on ? Hmmm, meaning in July ? or it could also be in December ?  

Oh and Since you are on the forum today, I'm really curious why you guys don't develop your own Sample Modeling Player, instead of using Kontakt ? Is Kontakt able to deliver all the functionality you need, so you don't need to bother making your own player ? or is this something you might consider doing in the future ? 

Cheers,
Muziksculp


----------



## DANIELE

muziksculp said:


> Hi @Giorgio Tommasini ,
> 
> Thanks for the feedback.
> 
> Later on ? Hmmm, meaning in July ? or it could also be in December ?
> 
> Oh and Since you are on the forum today, I'm really curious why you guys don't develop your own Sample Modeling Player, instead of using Kontakt ? Is Kontakt able to deliver all the functionality you need, so you don't need to bother making your own player ? or is this something you might consider doing in the future ?
> 
> Cheers,
> Muziksculp


If I remember correctly they said that it was on their list but they needs a lot more time to do it. A dedicated player means a lot of hard work and a lot of testing before an official release.


----------



## muziksculp

DANIELE said:


> If I remember correctly they said that it was on their list but they needs a lot more time to do it. A dedicated player means a lot of hard work and a lot of testing before an official release.


OK. Thanks for the feedback.

Hopefully I'm still alive when they release their new player.


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

muziksculp said:


> OK. Thanks for the feedback.
> 
> Hopefully I'm still alive when they release their new player.


Hopefully we're still alive as well when we release the next upgrade.


----------



## I like music

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> Hopefully we're still alive as well when we release the next upgrade. :-D


We're looking forward to what you have! Can you give any further teasers about some of the things the update brings? 

I know that there were some ambitious things going on behind the scenes, but any sort of "state of play" things would really be appreciated!


----------



## muziksculp

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> Hopefully we're still alive as well when we release the next upgrade. :-D


Yes,  and Wishing you lots of health, wisdom, ambition, and dedication to move this great technology forward. I know you can do it. It's just I have no patience 

Thanks.


----------



## Fa

I like music said:


> We're looking forward to what you have! Can you give any further teasers about some of the things the update brings?
> 
> I know that there were some ambitious things going on behind the scenes, but any sort of "state of play" things would really be appreciated!


I had a nice talk with Giorgio, and I really trust we all will be alive when the new release will be available, because it's still not possible to predict a precise date, but it's day by day closer to the target. 

I had also the chance (and the honour) of testing some prototypes, and supporting developers in the research, and there is something we are happy to disclose:

- we will get several small improvements in the engine following the musical intention of the player or the musical context of the sequence, that will produce more flexible and realistic bow/articulations in both the soft and the aggressive attacks.

- we will get a complete new set of IRs with enhanced acoustic behaviours, developed with an innovative and exclusive approach, after a long and accurate research on strings-instruments body resonances: that will deliver even more realistic and responsive sound and articulations.

- the actual set of solos and ensemble multi will be enlarged by a brand-new "chamber" or "studio" multi for each section: the expressivity and character of the new multi will fill the gap between the solos and symphonic ensemble, with the precise, sharp and intimate sound of a small section.

This last exciting add-on will find several applications: from hyper-realistic divisi to modern "dry-and-close" studio strings, rich in detail, and with a playability and phrasing never provided by any studio or chamber strings library before. 

The complete integration of this set with the solos and the symphonic ensembles will furthermore generate endless possibilities and combinations, to get the bold and expressive sound of large string orchestras, or the light and shiny sound of small baroque, pop or soundtrack strings ensembles.


----------



## muziksculp

Fa said:


> I had a nice talk with Giorgio, and I really trust we all will be alive when the new release will be available, because it's still not possible to predict a precise date, but it's day by day closer to the target.
> 
> I had also the chance (and the honour) of testing some prototypes, and supporting developers in the research, and there is something we are happy to disclose:
> 
> - we will get several small improvements in the engine following the musical intention of the player or the musical context of the sequence, that will produce more flexible and realistic bow/articulations in both the soft and the aggressive attacks.
> 
> - we will get a complete new set of IRs with enhanced acoustic behaviours, developed with an innovative and exclusive approach, after a long and accurate research on strings-instruments body resonances: that will deliver even more realistic and responsive sound and articulations.
> 
> - the actual set of solos and ensemble multi will be enlarged by a brand-new "chamber" or "studio" multi for each section: the expressivity and character of the new multi will fill the gap between the solos and symphonic ensemble, with the precise, sharp and intimate sound of a small section.
> 
> This last exciting add-on will find several applications: from hyper-realistic divisi to modern "dry-and-close" studio strings, rich in detail, and with a playability and phrasing never provided by any studio or chamber strings library before.
> 
> The complete integration of this set with the solos and the symphonic ensembles will furthermore generate endless possibilities and combinations, to get the bold and expressive sound of large string orchestras, or the light and shiny sound of small baroque, pop or soundtrack strings ensembles.


I'm super excited to read this. 

Thanks for updating us, I'm eagerly looking forward to the update.


----------



## pierrevigneron

Very exciting !!!


----------



## lychee

Fa said:


> I had a nice talk with Giorgio, and I really trust we all will be alive when the new release will be available, because it's still not possible to predict a precise date, but it's day by day closer to the target.
> 
> I had also the chance (and the honour) of testing some prototypes, and supporting developers in the research, and there is something we are happy to disclose:
> 
> - we will get several small improvements in the engine following the musical intention of the player or the musical context of the sequence, that will produce more flexible and realistic bow/articulations in both the soft and the aggressive attacks.
> 
> - we will get a complete new set of IRs with enhanced acoustic behaviours, developed with an innovative and exclusive approach, after a long and accurate research on strings-instruments body resonances: that will deliver even more realistic and responsive sound and articulations.
> 
> - the actual set of solos and ensemble multi will be enlarged by a brand-new "chamber" or "studio" multi for each section: the expressivity and character of the new multi will fill the gap between the solos and symphonic ensemble, with the precise, sharp and intimate sound of a small section.
> 
> This last exciting add-on will find several applications: from hyper-realistic divisi to modern "dry-and-close" studio strings, rich in detail, and with a playability and phrasing never provided by any studio or chamber strings library before.
> 
> The complete integration of this set with the solos and the symphonic ensembles will furthermore generate endless possibilities and combinations, to get the bold and expressive sound of large string orchestras, or the light and shiny sound of small baroque, pop or soundtrack strings ensembles.


Will you try to rekindle the interest I had in this library when it started?
I was about to resell the plugin, because I never really found it to my liking, there is always something wrong with the sound (after that it may be me who does not know how to use it).
But Sample Modeling is one of those companies that still makes great products, and I'm pretty much waiting to see what happens next.


----------



## I like music

Fa said:


> I had a nice talk with Giorgio, and I really trust we all will be alive when the new release will be available, because it's still not possible to predict a precise date, but it's day by day closer to the target.
> 
> I had also the chance (and the honour) of testing some prototypes, and supporting developers in the research, and there is something we are happy to disclose:
> 
> - we will get several small improvements in the engine following the musical intention of the player or the musical context of the sequence, that will produce more flexible and realistic bow/articulations in both the soft and the aggressive attacks.
> 
> - we will get a complete new set of IRs with enhanced acoustic behaviours, developed with an innovative and exclusive approach, after a long and accurate research on strings-instruments body resonances: that will deliver even more realistic and responsive sound and articulations.
> 
> - the actual set of solos and ensemble multi will be enlarged by a brand-new "chamber" or "studio" multi for each section: the expressivity and character of the new multi will fill the gap between the solos and symphonic ensemble, with the precise, sharp and intimate sound of a small section.
> 
> This last exciting add-on will find several applications: from hyper-realistic divisi to modern "dry-and-close" studio strings, rich in detail, and with a playability and phrasing never provided by any studio or chamber strings library before.
> 
> The complete integration of this set with the solos and the symphonic ensembles will furthermore generate endless possibilities and combinations, to get the bold and expressive sound of large string orchestras, or the light and shiny sound of small baroque, pop or soundtrack strings ensembles.


Amazing! Thank you so much for the update! Sounds very exciting!


----------



## DANIELE

Fa said:


> I had a nice talk with Giorgio, and I really trust we all will be alive when the new release will be available, because it's still not possible to predict a precise date, but it's day by day closer to the target.
> 
> I had also the chance (and the honour) of testing some prototypes, and supporting developers in the research, and there is something we are happy to disclose:
> 
> - we will get several small improvements in the engine following the musical intention of the player or the musical context of the sequence, that will produce more flexible and realistic bow/articulations in both the soft and the aggressive attacks.
> 
> - we will get a complete new set of IRs with enhanced acoustic behaviours, developed with an innovative and exclusive approach, after a long and accurate research on strings-instruments body resonances: that will deliver even more realistic and responsive sound and articulations.
> 
> - the actual set of solos and ensemble multi will be enlarged by a brand-new "chamber" or "studio" multi for each section: the expressivity and character of the new multi will fill the gap between the solos and symphonic ensemble, with the precise, sharp and intimate sound of a small section.
> 
> This last exciting add-on will find several applications: from hyper-realistic divisi to modern "dry-and-close" studio strings, rich in detail, and with a playability and phrasing never provided by any studio or chamber strings library before.
> 
> The complete integration of this set with the solos and the symphonic ensembles will furthermore generate endless possibilities and combinations, to get the bold and expressive sound of large string orchestras, or the light and shiny sound of small baroque, pop or soundtrack strings ensembles.


----------



## DSmolken

Ooh, smaller section options. I've always gotten a lot of use out of small sections.


----------



## Katznegold

Sounds very promising! will it be a free update for owners of V1?


----------



## DANIELE

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> No, Musiksculp, but you may expect a free upgrade later on.





Katznegold said:


> Sounds very promising! will it be a free update for owners of V1?


Look at the message I quoted!


----------



## Thorgod10

Fa said:


> I had a nice talk with Giorgio, and I really trust we all will be alive when the new release will be available, because it's still not possible to predict a precise date, but it's day by day closer to the target.
> 
> I had also the chance (and the honour) of testing some prototypes, and supporting developers in the research, and there is something we are happy to disclose:
> 
> - we will get several small improvements in the engine following the musical intention of the player or the musical context of the sequence, that will produce more flexible and realistic bow/articulations in both the soft and the aggressive attacks.
> 
> - we will get a complete new set of IRs with enhanced acoustic behaviours, developed with an innovative and exclusive approach, after a long and accurate research on strings-instruments body resonances: that will deliver even more realistic and responsive sound and articulations.
> 
> - the actual set of solos and ensemble multi will be enlarged by a brand-new "chamber" or "studio" multi for each section: the expressivity and character of the new multi will fill the gap between the solos and symphonic ensemble, with the precise, sharp and intimate sound of a small section.
> 
> This last exciting add-on will find several applications: from hyper-realistic divisi to modern "dry-and-close" studio strings, rich in detail, and with a playability and phrasing never provided by any studio or chamber strings library before.
> 
> The complete integration of this set with the solos and the symphonic ensembles will furthermore generate endless possibilities and combinations, to get the bold and expressive sound of large string orchestras, or the light and shiny sound of small baroque, pop or soundtrack strings ensembles.


Just as I expected, that a library such as this would be a key investment that would improve over time.
Am following this thread with great interest.


----------



## Bollen

lychee said:


> Will you try to rekindle the interest I had in this library when it started?
> I was about to resell the plugin, because I never really found it to my liking, there is always something wrong with the sound (after that it may be me who does not know how to use it).
> But Sample Modeling is one of those companies that still makes great products, and I'm pretty much waiting to see what happens next.


Well this seems to work for about 60-70% of everything I write (and I write a lot unorthodox stuff):

-First go to Pitch control (Menu 3) and put all the knobs up (somewhere between 80-90)

- Just play in using the Expression (CC11) and don't worry about attacks, play as expressively as possible. 

- now go back and edit the velocities to get the desired attack (low=gentle, high=harsh)

-Finally, I don't bother too much with CC1 (normally just set at 64) unless I want super expressive soaring lines (e.g. climax), but in which case I add CC99 to get that really passionate type playing.

I still have a use for my other string libraries, but SM seems to be doing most of the work! Maybe the new update will finally cover everything...


----------



## lettucehat

Bollen said:


> Well this seems to work for about 60-70% of everything I write (and I write a lot unorthodox stuff):
> 
> -First go to Pitch control (Menu 3) and put all the knobs up (somewhere between 80-90)
> 
> - Just play in using the Expression (CC11) and don't worry about attacks, play as expressively as possible.
> 
> - now go back and edit the velocities to get the desired attack (low=gentle, high=harsh)
> 
> -Finally, I don't bother too much with CC1 (normally just set at 64) unless I want super expressive soaring lines (e.g. climax), but in which case I add CC99 to get that really passionate type playing.
> 
> I still have a use for my other string libraries, but SM seems to be doing most of the work! Maybe the new update will finally cover everything...


Could you share some audio examples  I'm always interested in hearing what people can do with SM strings.


----------



## Bollen

lettucehat said:


> Could you share some audio examples  I'm always interested in hearing what people can do with SM strings.


No... 

In all seriousness, nothing I would want to share at the moment, I've just started with this library about a month ago.


----------



## DANIELE

lettucehat said:


> Could you share some audio examples  I'm always interested in hearing what people can do with SM strings.


If you want you can listen to some of my last pieces to listen to SM Strings in action (together with other instruments of course).


----------



## John Longley

Hey All,
I just purchased this library and am excited to dive in-- but for some reason the dry ensemble folder throws an error and no matter where I point Kontakt, it says the samples are missing. There also doesn't appear to be a dry folder for the solo strings. Any ideas before I start a support request. I just want to use them dry with MIR Pro.


----------



## I like music

John Longley said:


> Hey All,
> I just purchased this library and am excited to dive in-- but for some reason the dry ensemble folder throws an error and no matter where I point Kontakt, it says the samples are missing. There also doesn't appear to be a dry folder for the solo strings. Any ideas before I start a support request. I just want to use them dry with MIR Pro.


That's odd. I've downloaded it three times (for different updates) and not had that issue. 

Worth trying to download again?


----------



## John Longley

I like music said:


> That's odd. I've downloaded it three times (for different updates) and not had that issue.
> 
> Worth trying to download again?


Yes, it's very odd. Can you confirm there is a dry solo folder for you in 1.2b? 

I will try and download again, but none of the wet patches have any issue-- so it's very strange.


----------



## I like music

John Longley said:


> Yes, it's very odd. Can you confirm there is a dry solo folder for you in 1.2b?
> 
> I will try and download again, but none of the wet patches have any issue-- so it's very strange.


I realise that I hadn't actually installed 1.2b, and only 1.2. As it happens, I did very recently download the 1.2b UPDATE, and here's what it looks like.






So it seems there is a dry folder, and it contains .nkm files (I don't know what .nkm files are to be honest, and I know next to nothing about Kontakt stuff) but fwiw, this is what it contains.

Not sure if that helps or not.


----------



## John Longley

I like music said:


> I realise that I hadn't actually installed 1.2b, and only 1.2. As it happens, I did very recently download the 1.2b UPDATE, and here's what it looks like.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So it seems there is a dry folder, and it contains .nkm files (I don't know what .nkm files are to be honest, and I know next to nothing about Kontakt stuff) but fwiw, this is what it contains.
> 
> Not sure if that helps or not.


Yes, I have the same file structure. If you try loading one of the Dry String multis does it throw an error, or it loads as expected? 

Thanks for confirming.


----------



## John Longley

Update: Redownloaded and it didn't change. It appears the Dry patches have an issue, unless I am just uniquely cursed (possible).


----------



## Woodie1972

I have the same problem that Kontakt can't find the dry samples at first, but then I can point Kontakt to the right folder and they load without a problem. I know this is not helping you, but your problem is a) a known one and b) should be able to be fixed.


----------



## John Longley

Woodie1972 said:


> I have the same problem that Kontakt can't find the dry samples at first, but then I can point Kontakt to the right folder and they load without a problem. I know this is not helping you, but your problem is a) a known one and b) should be able to be fixed.


Thanks, for anybody that encounters it-- directing Kontakt to the Dry folder where it is expected, does not work. Directing it to the general "Samples" folder, will load the Dry Multi.


----------



## Ivan Duch

I purchased it yesterday. 1.2b as well and had the same bug. That said I also have pointed it to the general folder and it loaded the samples just fine.

So it seems to be a generalized bug with an easy solution.

Other than that I'm very happy with the purchase so far. I think I'll be layering it here and there, particularly for the shorts. But the level of expression is amazing. It's a great balance between expresiveness and timbre.

As for the shorts, I particularly find it hard to avoid a machine gun effect with them. Any tips?


----------



## muziksculp

Ivan Duch said:


> I purchased it yesterday. 1.2b as well and had the same bug. That said I also have pointed it to the general folder and it loaded the samples just fine.
> 
> So it seems to be a generalized bug with an easy solution.
> 
> Other than that I'm very happy with the purchase so far. I think I'll be layering it here and there, particularly for the shorts. But the level of expression is amazing. It's a great balance between expresiveness and timbre.
> 
> As for the shorts, I particularly find it hard to avoid a machine gun effect with them. Any tips?


Hi Ivan,

Congratulations ! 

Regarding the machine gun effect of the shorts, are you referring to the solo instruments, or the ensembles or both ?

Have you calibrated the velocity curve of your keyboard to the library ? 

This can help get more velocity variations, it makes the library a bit more responsive to the velocity values it is receiving from your keyboard controller.


----------



## I like music

Ivan Duch said:


> I purchased it yesterday. 1.2b as well and had the same bug. That said I also have pointed it to the general folder and it loaded the samples just fine.
> 
> So it seems to be a generalized bug with an easy solution.
> 
> Other than that I'm very happy with the purchase so far. I think I'll be layering it here and there, particularly for the shorts. But the level of expression is amazing. It's a great balance between expresiveness and timbre.
> 
> As for the shorts, I particularly find it hard to avoid a machine gun effect with them. Any tips?



Worth looking at attack detuning settings being higher for those, helps avoid machine gunning


----------



## Ivan Duch

Thanks a lot @muziksculp and @I like music! I've been experimenting with velocity, both while playing it and also while editing the midi. The attack detuning trick helps a lot, though.


----------



## muziksculp

@I like music Thanks for the tip . I haven't tried this Attack Detuning trick, I will give it a try. 

you are basically just modulating the Attack Detuning values to create more variety, and less of the machine gun effect ? This might be a very subtle effect though, it would be interesting to see how effective it is.


----------



## I like music

muziksculp said:


> @I like music Thanks for the tip . I haven't tried this Attack Detuning trick, I will give it a try.
> 
> you are basically just modulating the Attack Detuning values to create more variety, and less of the machine gun effect ? This might be a very subtle effect though, it would be interesting to see how effective it is.


Aye. May not be enough depending on your ear. You tweaked note length, and release settings? Add the attack type value and you should get enough variety? 

Let us know how it goes!


----------



## I like music

Alright, so I've forgotten how I updated by 1.1 strings to 1.2.

I am trying to go from 1.1 to 1.2b on my other computer, but I'm not sure of the process. The site says this:

"Please download the content and replace only the instruments (nkm and nki files) in your v. 1.2 folder"

What if I don't yet have a 1.2 folder? I just have 1.1

Do I have to go to 1.2 first and only then update to 1.2b? Any help hugely appreciated!


----------



## Fa

I like music said:


> Alright, so I've forgotten how I updated by 1.1 strings to 1.2.
> 
> I am trying to go from 1.1 to 1.2b on my other computer, but I'm not sure of the process. The site says this:
> 
> "Please download the content and replace only the instruments (nkm and nki files) in your v. 1.2 folder"
> 
> What if I don't yet have a 1.2 folder? I just have 1.1
> 
> Do I have to go to 1.2 first and only then update to 1.2b? Any help hugely appreciated!


Yes exactly: to the people previously posting, there are no "dry" samples, (as all the samples are dry in SM products) but just dry nkm files with already excluded effects for your convenience when you are using the instruments into external ambience and mix.

The instruments are saved by default to "point" the "samples" folder and nkr, so they have to stay in the same position of the old replaced instruments every time you update.

It's always recommended to keep the original structure and avoid re-saving, but in case you want to arrange it another way and/or you get a misalignment into your structure, the fast way to fix is "search for folder" Kontakt option, and scan the main directory: Kontakt will detect the selected files (samples and nkr) and load. Then you may save the multi or the nki with your favorite name/position and use them in the future accordingly.


----------



## Fa

Ivan Duch said:


> Thanks a lot @muziksculp and @I like music! I've been experimenting with velocity, both while playing it and also while editing the midi. The attack detuning trick helps a lot, though.


In addition, while always paying attention to the velocity (it creates lot of important effects, and has to be shaped with some pretty extreme range of value for better effect, really 0 to 127 sometime) you may also experiment variating the cc38 (attacks controller) that shapes the attacks sound and beside on-the-string off-the-string bow effects introduces attacks variations, across the range.


----------



## muziksculp

@Fa,

I would love it if the next update would make the effect of CC38 be more pronounced.

As is, it works fine, but it's a bit too subtle for my taste even at value 127, I always wished it can produce more aggressive sounding bow sounds at higher value ranges.

Thanks,
Muziksculp


----------



## John Longley

Fa said:


> Yes exactly: to the people previously posting, there are no "dry" samples, (as all the samples are dry in SM products) but just dry nkm files with already excluded effects for your convenience when you are using the instruments into external ambience and mix.
> 
> The instruments are saved by default to "point" the "samples" folder and nkr, so they have to stay in the same position of the old replaced instruments every time you update.
> 
> It's always recommended to keep the original structure and avoid re-saving, but in case you want to arrange it another way and/or you get a misalignment into your structure, the fast way to fix is "search for folder" Kontakt option, and scan the main directory: Kontakt will detect the selected files (samples and nkr) and load. Then you may save the multi or the nki with your favorite name/position and use them in the future accordingly.


Right, but by default Kontakt selects the Folder named "DRY". SM made the folder, not us-- it's an error. Pointing it to the general sample pool loads it, but by default it looks in Dry. I am really unclear on what distinction you were looking to make here. They provided multis that don't load properly, the fix is easy, but it does require a fix.


----------



## Ivan Duch

Fa said:


> In addition, while always paying attention to the velocity (it creates lot of important effects, and has to be shaped with some pretty extreme range of value for better effect, really 0 to 127 sometime) you may also experiment variating the cc38 (attacks controller) that shapes the attacks sound and beside on-the-string off-the-string bow effects introduces attacks variations, across the range.


Thank you for your reply @Fa !

I just tested it out. On my end, if I put 0 velocity on shorts they become inaudible. Seems like velocity handles volume for shorts along with cc11? If the notes are overlapping you still get a legato and velocity doesn't seem to affect the volume then. Is that normal behavior?

I'm still wondering how to get more variation from the shorts so I attached a comparison of the same line with BBCSO violin leader spicc (first one) patch and SM Solo Violin. In the example I modulated velocity, attacks, bow noise, pitch, attack time, release time and cc11 for SM.

Is it possible to make the shorts sound more varied like what the sampled violin from BBCSO can do? If so, how?

Again, the SM Violin (and the rest of the library) can do lots of amazing stuff, but the shorts I can't get much of for some specific uses and I wonder if it's me doing something wrong or the shorts are actually lacking on round robins (which I can't seem to fix by modulating CCs) and dynamic layers.

That said, I'm more than happy with the library because of all the other things I got it to do amazingly well, like super-expressive legatos, fast lines, and natural phrasing. It's a great complement to my other libraries and it does what all the other ones can't do.

*NOTE: The poor timing on the SM example is not representative of the library. It was just me playing it on a hurry and very poorly. But I hope it can still point to the issue I'm having. *


----------



## muziksculp

Hi,

Here is a link to the *SOS Magazine* Review of Sample Modeling Solo & Ens. Strings you can read, it's their March 2020 issue. 

The review covers both strengths, and weaknesses of this library. 

I'm hoping that some of the weaknesses it mentions can be improved in the upcoming update. The review was a good read for me. Hopefully you will find it interesting, and helpful as well. 

https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/sample-modeling-solo-ensemble-strings

Cheers,
Muziksculp


----------



## Ivan Duch

Great review! And makes you realize how many "secrets" the library has. Again, I'm very happy with the library. It's a change in paradigm for strings libraries, and revolutionary in its own way. 

I use Infinite Brass and Woodwinds as well, and the feeling of writing something or hearing something specific and being able to replicate (to a certain extent) its phrasing, emotion and expression is amazing.


----------



## Woodie1972

I wish with the new update the sound of the cello group would be improved; the sound is so metallic now, I simply can't listen through that. There were some tips in this thread to enhance it, but either I still do something wrong, or it doesn't make enough difference for me.


----------



## Bollen

Woodie1972 said:


> I wish with the new update the sound of the cello group would be improved; the sound is so metallic now, I simply can't listen through that. There were some tips in this thread to enhance it, but either I still do something wrong, or it doesn't make enough difference for me.


I have to say, I just don't hear it... Here's a comparison of 4 libraries:

A:
View attachment A.mp3

B:
View attachment B.mp3

C:
View attachment C.mp3

D:
View attachment D.mp3


Which one would you say sounds more metallic?


----------



## lettucehat

Bollen said:


> I have to say, I just don't hear it... Here's a comparison of 4 libraries:
> 
> A:
> View attachment A.mp3
> 
> B:
> View attachment B.mp3
> 
> C:
> View attachment C.mp3
> 
> D:
> View attachment D.mp3
> 
> 
> Which one would you say sounds more metallic?


I imagine A is Sample Modeling, but it's absolutely the best I've ever heard the cellos sound. If it's indeed A, it's mostly identifiable through the lack of vibrato and flawless transitions. What did you do??

Edit: I would add that the other examples have moments of being more _grating_ than A, but there's no doubt that SM cellos and basses come out of the box sounding very artificial. To be fair, all modeled cellos currently do!


----------



## Bollen

lettucehat said:


> I imagine A is Sample Modeling, but it's absolutely the best I've ever heard the cellos sound. If it's indeed A, it's mostly identifiable through the lack of vibrato and flawless transitions. What did you do??
> 
> Edit: I would add that the other examples have moments of being more _grating_ than A, but there's no doubt that SM cellos and basses come out of the box sounding very artificial. To be fair, all modeled cellos currently do!












Nothing else, everything is at default setting.


----------



## givemenoughrope

Bollen said:


> Nothing else, everything is at default setting.


Curious what B, C and D are


----------



## Bollen

givemenoughrope said:


> Curious what B, C and D are




A: SM
B: 8dio Century
C: VSL Orchestral Strings
D: VSL Dimensions


----------



## Woodie1972

Bollen said:


> I have to say, I just don't hear it... Here's a comparison of 4 libraries:
> 
> A:
> View attachment A.mp3
> 
> B:
> View attachment B.mp3
> 
> C:
> View attachment C.mp3
> 
> D:
> View attachment D.mp3
> 
> 
> Which one would you say sounds more metallic?


Well, that's indeed not that much difference as I have in my mind. 
I did the same test as you, but used 8DIO Anthology instead of Century (which I don't have) and added Synchron Strings I and PRO to the test for myself. I have the VSL Orchestral strings as well and it appeared that the highest octave (from C4/middle C) sounds pretty harsh, where Appassionata sounds much better in that region and overall has a richer sound of course. Synchron Strings PRO performed really nice (better than Synchron Strings I), as it had the most appealing sound IMO and the line sounded nice legato and natural, 8DIO wasn't bad either.


----------



## Bollen

Woodie1972 said:


> Well, that's indeed not that much difference as I have in my mind.
> I did the same test as you, but used 8DIO Anthology instead of Century (which I don't have) and added Synchron Strings I and PRO to the test for myself. I have the VSL Orchestral strings as well and it appeared that the highest octave (from C4/middle C) sounds pretty harsh, where Appassionata sounds much better in that region and overall has a richer sound of course. Synchron Strings PRO performed really nice (better than Synchron Strings I), as it had the most appealing sound IMO and the line sounded nice legato and natural, 8DIO wasn't bad either.


I'm not surprised by what you say, but for me sound is something I'm willing to compromise for flexibility. Most decent strings can be made to sound pretty good or even great, with careful heartfelt programming, some EQ and good reverb/depth. I love how VSL sounds, but its workflow is something I'm done with! The constant phasing issues, the thousands of keyswitches, no divisi, no alt techniques, uneven velocity layers, etc. With SM I can write almost anything and it performs more realistic, so far, than anything I have! You can have any combination of sections, divisi on the fly, multiple solo instruments, seamless transitions between notes, articulations, tremolos, etc. And best of all, you can have, apparently, endless different sounding string sections! 

Can't wait for the update!


----------



## AndyP

servandus said:


> I guess that's exactly the question here: are we talking about the live sound of the Vienna Philharmonic as if you we were listening to them in the Musikverein, or are we talking about the recording of the same orchestra in the same Hall as it sounds in your room/headphones? Because it's two completely different things. Worlds apart, in fact.
> 
> I think we're experimenting kind of a "cognitive dissonance" when we hear these new SM strings, because it's a bit like feeling the silky sound of live strings in a concert hall when we're expecting to hear the bite, clear, almost supernatural presence and detail of top string recordings. It's shocking, because it's like going to a concert, and start listening to the strings as if they were in your headphones... but exactly the other way around.
> 
> I've spent two afternoons messing around with the library, and I'm having so much fun with its playability and responsiveness that I'm somehow overlooking this issue, but let me post an example to illustrate what I mean. It's one of the pieces I've tried with the library this past couple of days, Sakamoto's Rain from the Last Emperor (a soundtrack I love). Please take it as it is, a quick, unpolished sketch. I might dedicate a little more time on this to try the effect of the ensemble size CC to simulate divisi, the bow sound CC to simulate presence, etc. and also use external pos/reverb for the mix, but for now I'm just having fun going over some midi files, blowing my breath controller as if I was "conducting" the piece... and enjoying it like a child, I should say 😆
> 
> 
> 
> I hear that sound, and I love that sound, because it reminds me of the tone experienced in a concert hall... but actually, headphones on, I can't help having the feeling that they're playing con sordini. And I can't get rid of that silky sound, no matter how far I push the velocities. Anyway, I think that those of us fortunate enough to be exposed to the sound of live strings on a regular basis will resonate better with the overall tone of this library.
> 
> I'll keep trying things, and post some more polished example if it's worth sharing.



This track has convinced me! It sounds very very good, with a few small limitations, but I also note that it is not yet fully processed.
I don't think I could play this track so vividly with one of my string libraries.
And by the way also a track by sakamoto that I like very much.

I would love to hear an example of how they sound when they play the high heels theme (more exposed).



And the Ensemble Version:


----------



## muziksculp

Hi,

I have been experimenting with SM Solo Strings to make them sound like Baroque/Period Instruments.

I started with the SM Solo Cello, I'm still working on improving it, but to give you a taste of what it sounds like at this stage, here is a short audio clip of SM Solo Baroque Cello.

I have quite a bit more to get it to where I want it be, but I'm quite confident I can get it to that level by tweaking, and sculpting it further. Also getting better at performing it using a Breath Controller.

View attachment Baroq SM Cello v1.mp3


----------



## PerryD

Probably blasphemy for the purists... I was trying for a vintage "Knights in White Satin" kind of string sound. Layering S&ES with SSP, about a 50/50 blend, each section played simultaneously. Both were set to CC2 for dynamics, using a breath controller. I think it yields a pretty warm sound but I need to come back with fresh ears later. Ignore my flugelhorn in the second half. Ha! The chord progression is actually from Rocket Man.


----------



## I like music

Any updates on the update? Someone dangled a teaser that we had some demos coming soon!


----------



## Cristian Labelli

I like music said:


> Any updates on the update? Someone dangled a teaser that we had some demos coming soon!




Here's a mock-up I've been working on, using the upcoming Samplemodeling Solo&Ensemble strings v.2.01. 

The excerpt is from Sergei Rachmaninoff, String Quartet No.1 (Scherzo).


----------



## lychee

Cristian Labelli said:


> Here's a mock-up I've been working on, using the upcoming Samplemodeling Solo&Ensemble strings v.2.01.
> 
> The excerpt is from Sergei Rachmaninoff, String Quartet No.1 (Scherzo).



Sounds good to my non-expert ear.
Maybe this update will bring me back to SM S&ES.


----------



## DANIELE

Cristian Labelli said:


> Here's a mock-up I've been working on, using the upcoming Samplemodeling Solo&Ensemble strings v.2.01.
> 
> The excerpt is from Sergei Rachmaninoff, String Quartet No.1 (Scherzo).









Wow, 2.01 already?!? I expect to download at least 2.5


----------



## lettucehat

Could be a bombshell if the cello sounds good on its own. So far I'm pretty encouraged by what I'm hearing out of my right ear!


----------



## Don Cajon

That's an enormous improvement compared to the current version and to any other library I have. Can't wait for the update. Wow! (Only listened to this on my smartphone, though)


----------



## DANIELE

I listened to the demo without looking at the video and I must see I still like it so much. I'm very curious about the ensembles too and I can't wait to do all my "stress tests" on the update.


----------



## muziksculp

@Cristian Labelli ,

The Rachmaninoff String Quartet demo you did using SM S&ES Strings Ver 2.01 sounds outstanding. Very well done. 

The timbre is so much better now. I wonder what they have done this time around, whatever it is they added, it sounds amazing. Can't wait to use 2.01 . Hopefully the update will be out very soon. 

I wonder if this also improved the sound of the String Sections, especially the short articulations, making them more snappy, and have more bite when that's needed. 

Thanks,
Muziksculp


----------



## Fa

muziksculp said:


> @Cristian Labelli ,
> 
> The Rachmaninoff String Quartet demo you did using SM S&ES Strings Ver 2.01 sounds outstanding. Very well done.
> 
> The timbre is so much better now. I wonder what they have done this time around, whatever it is they added, it sounds amazing. Can't wait to use 2.01 . Hopefully the update will be out very soon.
> 
> I wonder if this also improved the sound of the String Sections, especially the short articulations, making them more snappy, and have more bite when that's needed.
> 
> Thanks,
> Muziksculp


Yes, it did. 

And something more...


----------



## muziksculp

Fa said:


> Yes, it did.
> 
> And something more...


WOW.. I'm super excited about the 2.01 update. 

Thanks


----------



## I like music

Cristian Labelli said:


> Here's a mock-up I've been working on, using the upcoming Samplemodeling Solo&Ensemble strings v.2.01.
> 
> The excerpt is from Sergei Rachmaninoff, String Quartet No.1 (Scherzo).



Wow. Thank you so much!


----------



## I like music

Wait.. If people are writing demos already, then the library is completed, right???

Can't be long, then!


----------



## Trevor Meier

It sounds substantially improved! I still hear the somewhat unnatural progression from non-vib to vib that is my main pet peeve with SMS&ES (besides the cello tone ofc). While I much prefer SM’s tone & controllability, AM does a much better job in this one specific area. SM has this linear-sounding transition as vibrato increases that just doesn’t match how human players progress into vibrato to my ear.

Anyway, that one nitpick aside this really sounds like a significant upgrade!


----------



## muziksculp

Trevor Meier said:


> It sounds substantially improved! I still hear the somewhat unnatural progression from non-vib to vib that is my main pet peeve with SMS&ES (besides the cello tone ofc). While I much prefer SM’s tone & controllability, AM does a much better job in this one specific area. SM has this linear-sounding transition as vibrato increases that just doesn’t match how human players progress into vibrato to my ear.
> 
> Anyway, that one nitpick aside this really sounds like a significant upgrade!


What about the vibrato performance here using SM Solo & Ens. Strings ?


----------



## CT

Interesting....


----------



## Trevor Meier

muziksculp said:


> What about the vibrato performance here using SM Solo & Ens. Strings ?



Yes this is excellent - but that’s because he’s not using the built-in vibrato. This is his (very clever) “virtual vibrato technique” of shaking the horizontal sensor on the breath controller. Works great in this example! It’d be great if the plugin itself could better reproduce this behaviour without requiring a breath controller and bypassing the built-in vibrato progression.


----------



## muziksculp

Trevor Meier said:


> Yes this is excellent - but that’s because he’s not using the built-in vibrato. This is his (very clever) “virtual vibrato technique” of shaking the horizontal sensor on the breath controller. Works great in this example! It’d be great if the plugin itself could better reproduce this behaviour without requiring a breath controller and bypassing the built-in vibrato progression.


I agree.

But... What if they read your post, and decided to improve the current vibrato behavior, hence delay the release of 2.01 update.


----------



## Trevor Meier

muziksculp said:


> I agree.
> 
> But... What if they read your post, and decides to improve the current vibrato behavior, hence delay the release of 2.01 update.


In my mind it would be worth it! If they fixed the tone as well as the video suggests (as in, mere mortals without heavy processing can also get such good tone) then the added realism of better vibratos would make this by far the most useful and expressive string library I have.


----------



## muziksculp

Trevor Meier said:


> In my mind it would be worth it! If they fixed the tone as well as the video suggests (as in, mere mortals without heavy processing can also get such good tone) then the added realism of better vibratos would make this by far the most useful and expressive string library I have.


Yes, I wouldn't mind this either. This will bring it closer to perfection.

Realistic vibrato is such an integral part of string playing, the better they can emulate it, the better, and more realistic, and expressive the strings will sound. I'm all for an improvement to the Vibrato.


----------



## DANIELE

Well...what about the option of releasing the 2.01 and then releasing another patch for the vibrato thing?

I think we will enjoy this new huge update as it is. They will keep improving for sure in the future. I'm waiting for so long for this update to remake and old piece of mine.


----------



## Oxytoxine

Sounds stunning, looking forward to! 

Short question: Yesterday, I for the first time wanted to load the dry ensembles, but Kontakt says the samples are missing (V 1.21b) . The regular ensembles as well as the solo strings are functioning properly as usual. I have no idea why this happens (obviously Kontakt seems to find the samples / correct path when using the non-dry instruments), found nothing on the SM forum (haha, no, I mean Sample Modeling, not the other SM) and thus wanted to briefly ask whether this has occurred to some of you? I am not sure whether this is happening since I updated to 1.2b or was always there, since I did not yet previously use the dry ensembles.

(The update process was the most tedious I have ever experienced, they should really make this not that convoluted - so it's well possible that I did something wrong, but maybe not since the other instruments are working fine)

Thanks in case someone has an idea


----------



## Ben H

Oxytoxine said:


> Thanks in case someone has an idea



I'm guessing you installed the
"SM_Strings_v._1.2b_(Mac_PC)_UPDATE_(no_samples).zip"

When you need to need to run the "SM_Strings_v._1.2b_(Mac_PC)_UPDATE.zip" instead.

This is explained in the "How to update" text file that is attached in the zip file. 



> Updating version 1.0 (1.0.1) or 1.1
> 
> In case you still have the version 1.0 installed on your system (i.e. the library folder is named “Solo and Ensemble Strings”, without any version number), it is necessary to download the complete library v. 1.2 including samples (5 GB). This method can be also applied if you use v. 1.1 and prefer to download the content including the Samples folder. Please note: the Sample folders of v. 1.1 and 1.2 are identical. The download is a "dummy purchase" of the product file for 0 EUR. To accomplish that, a special coupon code is necessary, so please follow the steps below:
> 
> [snip]


----------



## Vardaro

For folks who _like _the existing cello sounds (..) it is vital not to crush the v. 1.2 patches (and samples).


----------



## Oxytoxine

Ben H said:


> I'm guessing you installed the
> "SM_Strings_v._1.2b_(Mac_PC)_UPDATE_(no_samples).zip"
> 
> When you need to need to run the "SM_Strings_v._1.2b_(Mac_PC)_UPDATE.zip" instead.
> 
> This is explained in the "How to update" text file that is attached in the zip file.


Thank you Ben! 

It is very well possible that I was not reading carefully enough and did run the wrong installer - will try as soon as I am home.


----------



## DANIELE

Vardaro said:


> For folks who _like _the existing cello sounds (..) it is vital not to crush the v. 1.2 patches (and samples).


In general backup all the library before upgrading is a good practice. I always have all the versions at my disposal. This is why, while I'm waiting for the 2.01, I'm using 1.1 together with 1.2b.


----------



## Vardaro

...and when we find our ideal cello tone we can save it as a newly named patch and share it !!


----------



## lychee

It says version 2.01, so this is a second iteration of the software and the question is, will current version owners have to pay for this update?


----------



## Ben H

lychee said:


> It says version 2.01, so this is a second iteration of the software and the question is, will current version owners have to pay for this update?


Probably. Updates have usually had a fee in the past.


----------



## DANIELE

If I remember correctly the always talked about a free update.


----------



## Thorgod10

I will gladly pay for updates if it allows the library to be a living product, improving over time and continuously matching the demand of current VSTs. 
Such a library I feel is suited for those that take their musicality quite seriously


----------



## Cristian Labelli

Trevor Meier said:


> It sounds substantially improved! I still hear the somewhat unnatural progression from non-vib to vib that is my main pet peeve with SMS&ES (besides the cello tone ofc). While I much prefer SM’s tone & controllability, AM does a much better job in this one specific area. SM has this linear-sounding transition as vibrato increases that just doesn’t match how human players progress into vibrato to my ear.
> 
> Anyway, that one nitpick aside this really sounds like a significant upgrade!


The attack of the vibrato can be controlled by CC#23 (Vibrato delay) which represents a facilitation mechanism for those who don't want to manually set CC#1 automations. Setting CC#23 to '0' you will be able to control meticulously the transition from non-vib to vib by yourself, without the contribution of any algorithm, allowing linear/logarithmic/slow/fast progressions 




Trevor Meier said:


> Yes this is excellent - but that’s because he’s not using the built-in vibrato. This is his (very clever) “virtual vibrato technique” of shaking the horizontal sensor on the breath controller. Works great in this example! It’d be great if the plugin itself could better reproduce this behaviour without requiring a breath controller and bypassing the built-in vibrato progression.


In the last mockup (Rachmaninoff) I only used the built-in vibrato: although my "virtual vibrato" is very natural and musical, I tend to prefer the sound result of the vibrato by CC#1. Sometimes I play the lines shaking my hand to know exactly where to put the vibrato in a natural way, then I just replace the pitch variations with CC#1 automations


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

We keep our word. The v. 2.01 upgrade will be free for all our customers, and the Covid reduced price will remain unchanged at Euro 299.00 (+ VAT if applicable).


----------



## Piano Pete

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> We keep our word. The v. 2.01 upgrade will be free for all our customers, and the Covid reduced price will remain unchanged at Euro 299.00 (+ VAT if applicable).


Fantastic. I was planning on grabbing these a little later this year once my schedule clears up and I actually have time to put them into ye olde template.


----------



## Aitcpiano

I'm really tempted by Sample modelling strings. Love Aaron Ventures Woods and Brass but missing some really playable strings. Is their anywhere I can check out some user demos using these strings? Only thing I'm a bit reluctant on is how easy it is to really fit into a mix and get a good tone due to its completely dry sound and do these strings really benefit from having a breath controller? What is the plans for the new update?


----------



## muziksculp

Cristian Labelli said:


> I only used the built-in vibrato: although my "virtual vibrato" is very natural and musical, I tend to prefer the sound result of the vibrato by CC#1.


What does "Virtual Vibrato" refer to with regards to this library ? Manually modulating the Pitch via CC or pitchbend ?

Thanks


----------



## muziksculp

Also looking forward to hear some 2.01 Ensemble demos when that is possible. 

Thanks.


----------



## muziksculp

One more detail for Sample Modeling, can you please include very clear, and easy to follow step-by- step instructions on how to update the library from the current version to the upcoming ver. 2.01 when it's ready.

Thanks


----------



## Martin S

Aitcpiano said:


> I'm really tempted by Sample modelling strings. Love Aaron Ventures Woods and Brass but missing some really playable strings. Is their anywhere I can check out some user demos using these strings? Only thing I'm a bit reluctant on is how easy it is to really fit into a mix and get a good tone due to its completely dry sound and do these strings really benefit from having a breath controller? What is the plans for the new update?


Leandro Gardini has some nice videos :













Check also Ramiro Gómez Massetti’s Walkthrough:


https://www.samplemodeling.com/products/strings/walkthrough


----------



## lychee

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> We keep our word. The v. 2.01 upgrade will be free for all our customers, and the Covid reduced price will remain unchanged at Euro 299.00 (+ VAT if applicable).


Great guys, this is very generous of you, even though I too would have been willing to pay for it, I was just asking the question to see if I should have budgeted for it.


----------



## muziksculp

Piano Pete said:


> Fantastic. I was planning on grabbing these a little later this year once my schedule clears up and I actually have time to put them into ye olde template.


This library keeps getting better, and better with each update, so it's a great investment, and tool to have, it keeps evolving, and improving with time. Which is an important feature to factor into your decision.


----------



## Piano Pete

muziksculp said:


> This library keeps getting better, and better with each update, so it's a great investment, and tool to have, it keeps evolving, and improving with time. Which is an important feature to factor into your decision.


Definitely seems that way. I have Audio Modeling's lineup, so it has just been a question of what order I go about getting these and a new MPE controller.


----------



## Ben H

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> We keep our word. The v. 2.01 upgrade will be free for all our customers, and the Covid reduced price will remain unchanged at Euro 299.00 (+ VAT if applicable).


Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you!!!


----------



## DANIELE

Cristian Labelli said:


> Sometimes I play the lines shaking my hand to know exactly where to put the vibrato in a natural way


This is a really interesting idea, I tend to disable Tilt and Nod controls due to the continuous movement my head is having while I'm playing but I didn't think about using the Tilt (or the Nod) that way.

How do you manage to avoid using it while you don't want to? I mean do you keep your head perfectly still? In the video seems that the sensor works only when you shake your hand but in my case I see it moving even if I try to avoid moving.

PS

Since you opened the pandora's box now it is my turn to ask you a simple question...when the update will be available so that I'm able to play with it with a smile on my face?


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

volete davvero il non-finito di Michelangelo?


----------



## AndyP

Am very excited about the update even if there will probably be no "snappy" spiccatos, That is my current state of knowledge. 2.01 already sounds promising and it will certainly not be the last update.


----------



## muziksculp

AndyP said:


> Am very excited about the update even if there will probably be no "snappy" spiccatos


Hmmm... And what makes you think there won't be "super snappy" spiccatos in this upcoming update ?


----------



## DANIELE

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> volete davvero il non-finito di Michelangelo?


No dai, meglio il David.


----------



## AndyP

muziksculp said:


> Hmmm... And what makes you think there won't be "super snappy" spiccatos in this upcoming update ?


I asked about it.


----------



## DANIELE

AndyP said:


> I asked about it.


I remember they said the shorts will be sharper but I actually don't remember exactly when/where. Maybe I don't remember correctly.


----------



## Fa

AndyP said:


> I asked about it.


Not sure what a "super snappy" spiccato is supposed to be. ( perhaps a new score mark?  ) Joking... may you give us some examples, and I will let you know if it can or can't be replicated.


----------



## DANIELE

Fa said:


> Not sure what a "super snappy" spiccato is supposed to be. ( perhaps a new score mark?  ) Joking... may you give us some examples, and I will let you know if it can or can't be replicated.


I think he is talking about the general sharpness of short notes in 1.2b where there are some flaws if you look for really sharp spiccatos. In 1.1 the sharpness is better than in 1.2b and this is why some users are asking if this problem is addressed in 2.01.


----------



## Fa

DANIELE said:


> I remember they said the shorts will be sharper but I actually don't remember exactly when/where. Maybe I don't remember correctly.


Definitely they will. I confirm it. 
But still not sure about whatasupersnappyis, so let's see after listening some examples.


----------



## I like music

Fa said:


> Definitely they will. I confirm it.
> But still not sure about whatasupersnappyis, so let's see after listening some examples.


I'm more interested in super snappy release!
Surely we can have a more precise release date now?😊


----------



## muziksculp

Fa said:


> Not sure what a "super snappy" spiccato is supposed to be. ( perhaps a new score mark?  ) Joking... may you give us some examples, and I will let you know if it can or can't be replicated.


LOL... I'm the one who mentioned "Super Snappy", @AndyP , mentioned "Snappy" Spiccato, I was just elaborating in a fun way.

What I meant is very short, and fast/responsive spiccato sounding bowings. I hope the update has improved this, so one can get very detailed, edgy sounding very short bowing action sounds when needed.


----------



## Trevor Meier

Cristian Labelli said:


> The attack of the vibrato can be controlled by CC#23 (Vibrato delay) which represents a facilitation mechanism for those who don't want to manually set CC#1 automations. Setting CC#23 to '0' you will be able to control meticulously the transition from non-vib to vib by yourself, without the contribution of any algorithm, allowing linear/logarithmic/slow/fast progressions
> 
> 
> 
> In the last mockup (Rachmaninoff) I only used the built-in vibrato: although my "virtual vibrato" is very natural and musical, I tend to prefer the sound result of the vibrato by CC#1. Sometimes I play the lines shaking my hand to know exactly where to put the vibrato in a natural way, then I just replace the pitch variations with CC#1 automations


The CC1 modulation is what I’m referring to as I prefer to have control over the timing. There’s something about how CC1 progresses that I can never quite get the transition to feel human. Perhaps I’m not doing it right, but I’ve spent a fair amount of time trying.

Just like the tone improvements - you can get V1.2 to sound very good, but it requires significant effort and knowledge. It’s much better if the tone is excellent out of the box for mere mortals; same for the vibrato.


----------



## muziksculp

Trevor Meier said:


> The CC1 modulation is what I’m referring to as I prefer to have control over the timing. There’s something about how CC1 progresses that I can never quite get the transition to feel human


Have you tried using CC23 as @Cristian Labelli mentioned ? to test how it affects the Vibrato when CC23 is set to various values, including zero ? 

Maybe posting an audio clip of what about the vibrato you dislike would also be helpful.


----------



## Piano Pete

Question, are there any complex, virtuosic examples with Sample modeling? There are plenty for Audio Modeling—aside from the fact that I already have them, and this, is one of the main reasons they have been my go-to solo strings as I have been able to produce the phrasing I am used to hearing or would want from a live performance. 

There are definitely plenty of great examples by those in this thread and by Christian that showcase what sample modeling can achieve, but all of the pieces I have heard tend to be fairly straightforward musically. 

Fortunately, or unfortunately, a fair portion of my soloistic writing tends to be technically hefty: the reason why I gravitated towards AM when they came out.

Honestly, I'm just trying to decide in which order I should replace my MPE controller or get the solo strings. If Sample modeling can handle any of the more technically complex figures, I'll probably grab them before a new board since I have other ways of quickly getting multiple midi lanes in the meantime.


----------



## AndyP

For lack of AM I can not compare, but from the examples I have heard, I have the impression that with AM more extreme playing styles, also tonally, can be realized.

I haven't had the SM strings that long, but I find that they are more on the softer side, less "harsh". Less extreme, but great in the "standards".


----------



## Fa

Piano Pete said:


> Question, are there any complex, virtuosic examples with Sample modeling? There are plenty for Audio Modeling—aside from the fact that I already have them, and this, is one of the main reasons they have been my go-to solo strings as I have been able to produce the phrasing I am used to hearing or would want from a live performance.
> 
> There are definitely plenty of great examples by those in this thread and by Christian that showcase what sample modeling can achieve, but all of the pieces I have heard tend to be fairly straightforward musically.
> 
> Fortunately, or unfortunately, a fair portion of my soloistic writing tends to be technically hefty: the reason why I gravitated towards AM when they came out.
> 
> Honestly, I'm just trying to decide in which order I should replace my MPE controller or get the solo strings. If Sample modeling can handle any of the more technically complex figures, I'll probably grab them before a new board since I have other ways of quickly getting multiple midi lanes in the meantime.


Despite the fact they have a lot in common (from playability and the "continuum" unlimited range of expressions/articulations) still AM and SM are very different beasts:

- if you are looking for a synthesizer that will enable simulation of almost any possible behaviour of the instrument string/bow, then AM is probably the good tool (almost no competition on this field)

- if you are looking to nail down the real sound of a strings quartet, then SM should be your choice, because at the actual status of technology, AM will never reach it (a part for some very noisy and extreme scratch or low pressure FX that AM makes pretty well as you mentioned, and are actually out of scope for SM S&ES).

Here anyway a sample of virtuosic violin solo with SM:
samplemodeling solo violin - Paganini


----------



## Piano Pete

Fa said:


> Despite the fact they have a lot in common (from playability and the "continuum" unlimited range of expressions/articulations) still AM and SM are very different beasts:
> 
> - if you are looking for a synthesizer that will enable simulation of almost any possible behaviour of the instrument string/bow, then AM is probably the good tool (almost no competition on this field)
> 
> - if you are looking to nail down the real sound of a strings quartet, then SM should be your choice, because at the actual status of technology, AM will never reach it (a part for some very noisy and extreme scratch or low pressure FX that AM makes pretty well as you mentioned, and are actually out of scope for SM S&ES).
> 
> Here anyway a sample of virtuosic violin solo with SM:
> samplemodeling solo violin - Paganini


Your excerpt was exactly what I was looking for.

I wasnt trying to find a replacement for AM, but more a supplement; however, the big thing I was trying to determine was the spectrum Sample modeling can comfortably traverse—before I would need to switch over to AM or just call it a scratch and get a live player.

Based on what you sent, I think Sample Modeling (based on everything else I have heard) can handle probably 80-85% of everything you would normally write—at least for media projects.

I'm already a long time user of their brass instruments, so I figure the learning period will be fairly short, but your demo has pushed me to grab SM before the replacement MPE board. 

Curse limited time and funds!


----------



## Paul Jelfs

It sounds really tempting, I just worry about how much of a learning curve there is involved in getting the most from the library. 

Do you think it is best to purchase BEFORE the update, as the Price may go back to the Pre Covid price ? If it has not already


----------



## Oxytoxine

Paul Jelfs said:


> It sounds really tempting, I just worry about how much of a learning curve there is involved in getting the most from the library.
> 
> Do you think it is best to purchase BEFORE the update, as the Price may go back to the Pre Covid price ? If it has not already


I had the exact same concern - having to make use of a gazillion of different CCs can be very intimidating and (for me) completely defies the purpose why I am hopping on the no-Keyswitch train, as this takes at least the same amount of time / fiddling if not more.

But then I discovered that many beautiful demos make only use of dynamics and vibrato 

But indeed, if you start to employ the full arsenal of available choices, it gets extremely tedious, and I personally would not see the main advantage modeled approaches have - easier and faster workflow, more "musical" composing process. I would advice to first treat them almost like you would a traditional (keyswitch) lib (obviously the playing style will be very different), and then step by step explore the further possibilities, e.g. does a shorter attack on this few notes make a difference? Does adding overtones or whatever sound more real in this or that context? I originally wanted to control as many CCs as possible in realtime while sequencing, but one has only two feets and two hands anyway . At least that's the approach I take with these instruments - as a non-strings player I have to reverse engineer this stuff. Maybe if you play these instruments yourself you can also more directly anticipate the use / effect of certain parameters. But it is, at least for me, indeed a rabbit hole, and it's difficult to say "stop" and leave a piece as it is - there are always a ton more microcorrections possible that might have a rather dramatic influence on the end result. But be warned: once you have used modeled instruments like SM, AM or AV, it's very hard to go back to the conventional keyswitch workflow


----------



## Bollen

Fa said:


> Despite the fact they have a lot in common (from playability and the "continuum" unlimited range of expressions/articulations) still AM and SM are very different beasts:
> 
> - if you are looking for a synthesizer that will enable simulation of almost any possible behaviour of the instrument string/bow, then AM is probably the good tool (almost no competition on this field)
> 
> - if you are looking to nail down the real sound of a strings quartet, then SM should be your choice, because at the actual status of technology, AM will never reach it (a part for some very noisy and extreme scratch or low pressure FX that AM makes pretty well as you mentioned, and are actually out of scope for SM S&ES).
> 
> Here anyway a sample of virtuosic violin solo with SM:
> samplemodeling solo violin - Paganini


That's mighty impressive! Mind telling us how you achieved that ricochet type articulation? Or perhaps sharing the MIDI? 

I thought I had figured everything out on these instruments already, clearly not....


----------



## muziksculp

Bollen said:


> That's mighty impressive! Mind telling us how you achieved that ricochet type articulation? Or perhaps sharing the MIDI?
> 
> I thought I had figured everything out on these instruments already, clearly not....


It would be so helpful if there were more detailed advanced video tutorials for this library.


----------



## lettucehat

Fa said:


> Despite the fact they have a lot in common (from playability and the "continuum" unlimited range of expressions/articulations) still AM and SM are very different beasts:
> 
> - if you are looking for a synthesizer that will enable simulation of almost any possible behaviour of the instrument string/bow, then AM is probably the good tool (almost no competition on this field)
> 
> - if you are looking to nail down the real sound of a strings quartet, then SM should be your choice, because at the actual status of technology, AM will never reach it (a part for some very noisy and extreme scratch or low pressure FX that AM makes pretty well as you mentioned, and are actually out of scope for SM S&ES).
> 
> Here anyway a sample of virtuosic violin solo with SM:
> samplemodeling solo violin - Paganini


And this is with v1.2b or earlier? Wow.


----------



## I like music

Bollen said:


> That's mighty impressive! Mind telling us how you achieved that ricochet type articulation? Or perhaps sharing the MIDI?
> 
> I thought I had figured everything out on these instruments already, clearly not....


They put the MIDI up here I believe...

https://www.samplemodeling.com/products/strings/downloads


----------



## shawnsingh

Fa said:


> Despite the fact they have a lot in common (from playability and the "continuum" unlimited range of expressions/articulations) still AM and SM are very different beasts:
> 
> - if you are looking for a synthesizer that will enable simulation of almost any possible behaviour of the instrument string/bow, then AM is probably the good tool (almost no competition on this field)
> 
> - if you are looking to nail down the real sound of a strings quartet, then SM should be your choice, because at the actual status of technology, AM will never reach it (a part for some very noisy and extreme scratch or low pressure FX that AM makes pretty well as you mentioned, and are actually out of scope for SM S&ES).
> 
> Here anyway a sample of virtuosic violin solo with SM:
> samplemodeling solo violin - Paganini


Pro tip, as someone who played this long ago, I think it sounds surprisingly good except the relative velocity of each 4 notes in each ricochet stroke should be successively weaker. To get the ricochet across all four strings, a player has to "attack" the first note of each bow direction to get it to start bouncing.

Otherwise, sounds pretty good!


----------



## Vardaro

@Oxytoxine (and others) we should _listen, _many times over, to good (and bad!) recordings, to get a hint of real playing, with its subtleties, its irregularities and the exact nature of "note-ons"..
For example, the Paganini extract is amazing, but the real player has to compensate for the slower reactions of the lower strings or they may sound weaker.

When working to a deadline, or to save one's marriage, a gentle, separate, randomization of almost all parameters would really help realism.


----------



## novaburst

Vardaro said:


> save one's marriage, a gentle, separate, randomization of almost all parameters would really help realism.


Now you tell me ...........


----------



## I like music

Vardaro said:


> a gentle, separate, randomization of almost all parameters would really help realism


I thought an element of this randomisation aleady existed? Or rather, you can set key values in such a way that there is a bracket within which you'll hear those randomisations. I even thought (though it has been too long since I've even touched the music computer so cannot remember) that things like vibrato etc had randomisation baked in. As to the _nature_ of randomisations (e.g. are they totally random or do they have a tendancy towards how a human likely behaves) I have no idea.

In either case, I'm excited for what's next.


----------



## I like music

Whenever I ask for a release date, @Giorgio Tommasini just laugh reacts. I wonder if I ask again if he'll do the same again, or if this time, he might tell us


----------



## AndyP

On my wishlist: Two keyswitches for up- downbow change. Would also be cool if you could additionally automate this so that they take place in alternation. For shorts this would be a nice feature too.


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

AndyP said:


> On my wishlist: Two keyswitches for up- downbow change. Would also be cool if you could additionally automate this so that they take place in alternation. For shorts this would be a nice feature too.


This is already partly implemented. By pressing KS C, the next note will be forced to be a downbow. Otherwise, subsequent staccato notes are automatically alternated as down- and upbow.


----------



## AndyP

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> This is already partly implemented. By pressing KS C, the next note will be forced to be a downbow. Otherwise, subsequent staccato notes are automatically alternated as down- and upbow.


I should read the manual again ... Thanks Giorgio, then I will listen again a little more closely, and read!


----------



## Bollen

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> This is already partly implemented. By pressing KS C, the next note will be forced to be a downbow. Otherwise, subsequent staccato notes are automatically alternated as down- and upbow.


I would, personally, like to see a better Round Robin implementation. At the moment it's way too easy to get the machine gun effect...


----------



## zigzag

Bollen said:


> I would, personally, like to see a better Round Robin implementation. At the moment it's way too easy to get the machine gun effect...


+1. For repeated shorts and tremolos. Implementation for trills is already fantastic.


----------



## muziksculp

What about the Pizz. ? Do you like the way the current ones sound ? 

Honestly, I'm not a big fan of the Pizz. sound, not sure if they are being improved in the next update.


----------



## zigzag

muziksculp said:


> What about the Pizz. ? Do you like the way the current ones sound ?
> 
> Honestly, I'm not a big fan of the Pizz. sound, not sure if they are being improved in the next update.


Pizz needs improvements too IMO. I forgot to mention it. But if all these are improved I won't need my other string libs anymore


----------



## Bollen

muziksculp said:


> What about the Pizz. ? Do you like the way the current ones sound ?
> 
> Honestly, I'm not a big fan of the Pizz. sound, not sure if they are being improved in the next update.


I like the sound just fine (the Bartók snap could use improvement), but the RR has the same issue. Especially if you consider that pizz are often played repeated...


----------



## muziksculp

Bollen said:


> (the Bartók snap could use improvement)


Yeah.. it sounds like a whip hitting a metallic sheet. Scared the hell out of me a few times 

On the positive side.. I never use Bartok snap, and don't know why developers feel they are needed.


----------



## Bollen

zigzag said:


> But if all these are improved I won't need my other string libs anymore


I'll always need my other libraries for ponts, tastos, extended techniques, etc.



muziksculp said:


> don't know why developers feel they are needed.


For people like me!


----------



## lychee

A better round robin, a better piz, a better ...
Stop asking too much, otherwise we will have an update in 5 years directly to version 4.01. 
Obviously I'm kidding, like you I expect a better S&ES in all points.


----------



## muziksculp

Bollen said:


> I'll always need my other libraries for ponts, tastos, extended techniques, etc.
> 
> 
> For people like me!


Funny, I listen to tons of Soundtrack music, I haven't heard a single Bartok Snap come up in any of the tracks I listened to for at least the past six months. Now do we really need Bartok Snaps ? I don't, but if you do, when do you use them ? Personally I hate the way they sound.


----------



## zigzag

Pizz sound of an ensemble patch is a bit thin, like if there is not enough variation in sound & timing between players. But machine gun effect is even more obvious.


----------



## muziksculp

If I need Pizz. when using SM Solo & Ens. Strings, I use another library. Problem fixed.


----------



## zigzag

lychee said:


> A better round robin, a better piz, a better ...
> Stop asking too much, otherwise we will have an update in 5 years directly to version 4.01.
> Obviously I'm kidding, like you I expect a better S&ES in all points.


True, I prefer more frequent smaller updates. That way I'm always excited for an update that's just around the corner


----------



## Bollen

muziksculp said:


> when do you use them


That's a tricky question... When do you use a minor 3rd interval? I suppose I use it when I need it. I don't write much "Soundtrack" music, I mostly write contemporary classical(-ish) music.



zigzag said:


> True, I prefer more frequent smaller updates. That way I'm always excited for an update that's just around the corner


You sound like a gamer...


----------



## muziksculp

Bollen said:


> I mostly write contemporary classical(-ish) music.


That must be a very unique genre.


----------



## clisma

Bartok Pizzicato can be very useful for action cues, punctuating certain beats. An alternative to using percussion.


----------



## muziksculp

clisma said:


> Bartok Pizzicato can be very useful for action cues, punctuating certain beats. An alternative to using percussion.


LOL.. I would rather use percussion to punctuate certain beats why go bother the string players, to do that, and in doing so, they can also mess up their instruments .. You know string players don't like doing this to their expensive, and valued instruments. Damn You Bartok Snap


----------



## Bollen

muziksculp said:


> LOL.. I would rather use percussion to punctuate certain beats why go bother the string players, to do that, and in doing so, they can also mess up their instruments .. You know string players don't like doing this to their expensive, and valued instruments. Damn You Bartok Snap


Well as a cellist I can tell you it does no damage to the instrument... In fact, the only "extended" technique that might is when you have to hit the body with the wooden part of the bow, that's the only one I refuse to do!


----------



## muziksculp

Bollen said:


> Well as a cellist I can tell you it does no damage to the instrument... In fact, the only "extended" technique that might is when you have to hit the body with the wooden part of the bow, that's the only one I refuse to do!


But deep inside, your cello is saying : Stop doing that, you are hurting me. Although you don't see any damage on the outside.


----------



## Bollen

muziksculp said:


> But deep inside, your cello is saying : Stop doing that, you are hurting me. Although you don't see any damage on the outside.


Nah... It's going snap that hinny!






By the way, here are some colourful uses I found after a quick Google search:


----------



## MikeLG

muziksculp said:


> Funny, I listen to tons of Soundtrack music, I haven't heard a single Bartok Snap come up in any of the tracks I listened to for at least the past six months. Now do we really need Bartok Snaps ? I don't, but if you do, when do you use them ? Personally I hate the way they sound.


I think Back to the Future uses Bartok Snap.


----------



## muziksculp

MikeLG said:


> I think Back to the Future uses Bartok Snap.


Now I know why I didn't like that score.


----------



## Bollen

muziksculp said:


> Now I know why I didn't like that score.


But surely you love the Moonrise one above?


----------



## CT

Also plenty of snappy behavior in scores by James Newton Howard, Hans Zimmer, Don Davis....


----------



## muziksculp

I think one of the issues is that SM Solo & Ens. Strings Pizz. do not offer a large enough dynamic range, like the Moonrise video above, which sounds great.

I'm also not a big fan of the SM Solo & Ens Strings Pizz. timbre. too thin, and metallic sounding for my taste.


----------



## Bollen

muziksculp said:


> I think one of the issues is that SM Solo & Ens. Strings Pizz. do not offer a large enough dynamic range, like the Moonrise video above, which sounds great.
> 
> I'm also not a big fan of the SM Solo & Ens Strings Pizz. timbre. too thin, and metallic sounding for my taste.


Oh absolutely! I just meant in general... Silly me!


----------



## chapbot

You know what might be cool... if they would create different articulation patches like the typical staccato, marcato etc.

You might say but that defeats the purpose of the library since it can do everything all at once.

True but that would help people like me who are too lazy and stupid to understand how to program it properly to have pre-made articulations that are optimized for best sound, realism and performance.


----------



## Bollen

chapbot said:


> You know what might be cool... if they would create different articulation patches like the typical staccato, marcato etc.
> 
> You might say but that defeats the purpose of the library since it can do everything all at once.
> 
> True but that would help people like me who are too lazy and stupid to understand how to program it properly to have pre-made articulations that are optimized for best sound, realism and performance.


Well the thing is in the brass it's extremely easy to do, you want a staccato? Play short, you want a marcato hit the key harder, but for some reason the strings don't quite work this way...


----------



## chapbot

Bollen said:


> Well the thing is in the brass it's extremely easy to do, you want a staccato? Play short, you want a marcato hit the key harder, but for some reason the strings don't quite work this way...


Yep the brass is absolutely spectacular. That's why I bought the strings but they are nowhere near the quality.


----------



## Woodie1972

muziksculp said:


> Funny, I listen to tons of Soundtrack music, I haven't heard a single Bartok Snap come up in any of the tracks I listened to for at least the past six months. Now do we really need Bartok Snaps ? I don't, but if you do, when do you use them ? Personally I hate the way they sound.


Listen to the soundtrack 'Signs' by James Newton Howard, there he uses Bartok pizz.


----------



## DANIELE

chapbot said:


> You know what might be cool... if they would create different articulation patches like the typical staccato, marcato etc.
> 
> You might say but that defeats the purpose of the library since it can do everything all at once.
> 
> True but that would help people like me who are too lazy and stupid to understand how to program it properly to have pre-made articulations that are optimized for best sound, realism and performance.


This would break the purpose of this library, there are already plenty of pre baked articulation based libraries out there. Spitfire did A LOT of strings libraries: studio strings, room strings, orchestral strings, bathroom strings, silence strings, not played strings, sleepy strings and so on...you have a lot of options out there.

SM Strings has to be fast and playable. I also think they have to improve extended techniques but I'm sure they will.


----------



## DANIELE

muziksculp said:


> LOL.. I would rather use percussion to punctuate certain beats why go bother the string players, to do that, and in doing so, they can also mess up their instruments .. You know string players don't like doing this to their expensive, and valued instruments. Damn You Bartok Snap


----------



## DANIELE

I also used the Bartok Pizzicato but I prefer the Col Legno technique, it could sound like a ticking clock and it is great to punctuate some passages. It is not the same thing of using percussions.


----------



## AndyP

Pizzicato is one of the articulations I use least often, maybe I should write something exclusively for it? Bartok, on the other hand, when there's a lot of bang behind it, I like very much.

I tried up- and downbow C0 again, I can hardly hear the difference. And maybe it is also due to the few round robins of the shorts that I have not noticed so far.

This library has so many possibilities when it comes to using cc's, I have still only scratched the surface, although for many things I play it is usually enough to get the result with dynamics and vibrato. There is certainly much more to get out of it.


----------



## Fa

Just a general comment on several of the interesting posts and points of view. the interaction of bow and strings is far more complex than the interaction blow-lips-mouthpiece of the winds. For that reason is not surprising in my very humble opinion that you can't get a universal response from pure dynamic and touch on the keyboard. Still the SM Strings are very responsive and flexible, and can mimic the general purpose articulations out -of-the-box just pressing the keys and modulating cc11 accordingly, but for nuances and scratch intensity, a further standardization should be arbitrary and so the additional controllers enter the game.

Not an excessive complexity by the way: e.g. the basics are
- want shorter attack? shorten cc26 attack time (anyway velocity responsive)
- want shorter tail/resonance? shorten release time.
- want harsher marcato? rise cc38 attack
- want pure spiccato? low cc38 attack and keep high velocity + keep duration as short as possible.

For realistic effect, never forget of keep moving velocity and cc11, never forget to exclude vibrato from short notes (it's automatically disabled by AI, but it can disturb if it moves rapidly capturing back the attention of the AI script).

my 2 cents...


----------



## muziksculp




----------



## I like music

I bounce between this thread and the AV thread copy pasting the phrase "are the strings out yet?"

An efficient use of my time :D


----------



## Bollen

Fa said:


> you can't get a universal response from pure dynamic and touch on the keyboard.


Absolutely and couldn't agree more! I feel woodwinds in general should also gets this treatment e.g. tongued, soft-tongued & untongued, the former and the latter on releases too. 

I suppose my pet peeve is that these controllers, which are perfectly manageable, just don't produce a very obvious difference even between extremes. They're also labelled quite unintuitively e.g. we have two knobs called Attack??? This is the behaviour I would expect according to the manual:

Velocity: low=swell into note, high=marcato 
Attack Time on detached notes: on low velocity=speed of swell, on high velocity length of the marcato (fp vs sfz)
Attacks (cc38): low=clean bowed, high scratchy over-pressured. 

You'll probably say this is how they work now, but it's just not audible. For example if I move the attack time while pressing hard there's no difference. The releases do have some difference, but I would expect an off-the-string release to be far more audible, after all I play the cello and know what it's suppose to sound like. The "attacks" knob is even less obvious what it's suppose to be doing...

I hope Giorgio sees this...


----------



## muziksculp

Bollen said:


> You'll probably say this is how they work now, but it's just not audible. For example if I move the attack time while pressing hard there's no difference. The releases do have some difference, but I would expect an off-the-string release to be far more audible, after all I play the cello and know what it's suppose to sound like. The "attacks" knob is even less obvious what it's suppose to be doing...


Yes, this is what I experience as well. 

@Fa ,

Maybe you can enlighten us with some video tutorials on how best to get them to be more audible.

As I mentioned earlier, I feel we need more Advanced Video Tutorials for this library, just in case we are missing something important when using it. i.e. CC38's effect is too subtle most of the time when I use it. 

I also wonder if the 2.01 update is going to improve the above mentioned functionalities of the library.


----------



## richhickey

Fa said:


> Not an excessive complexity by the way: e.g. the basics are
> - want shorter attack? shorten cc26 attack time (anyway velocity responsive)
> - want shorter tail/resonance? shorten release time.
> - want harsher marcato? rise cc38 attack
> - want pure spiccato? low cc38 attack and keep high velocity + keep duration as short as possible.


In theory, yes. In practice those controls do very little IMO, and don't approach the range of variation needed.


----------



## Fa

richhickey said:


> In theory, yes. In practice those controls do very little IMO, and don't approach the range of variation needed.


I assume that you got the way the controllers have to be combined (each of the mentioned doesn't act alone, but just in combination with velocity, duration and cc11) and then you are probably referring to some pretty extreme effect you can't replicate.

Otherwise I can't get how the examples made by me, Cristian, Leandro and others should be possible: they show that a pretty wide range of common musical articulation variations are definitely possible and convincing.

For all the people curious about the topic, anyway I can confirm that improvements in the sharpness of the attack and its control are part of the incoming update.


----------



## muziksculp

@Fa,

Advanced video tutorials for SM Solo & Ens. Strings are badly needed to harness the power of this library. Especially showing how to use the various CC's with combination of Velocity, and CC11, CC1, and how they interact, how to get a noticeable change that is not just subtle when needed, ...etc. 

Can we expect any soon ? 

Thanks.


----------



## I like music

Lets not get distracted, and remember what our focus should be:

To hunt down the release date!!!

So...


----------



## Ivan Duch

I agree that a tutorial covering those aspects in practical examples would be awesome. 

I love the library and still use it every day and I'm pretty sure I'm missing a lot of stuff. 

For instance, I was amazed at that Paganini Capriccio Demo. I didn't even know the library could approach ricochet in that way. 

That 2.01 demo sounds great by the way!


----------



## Teldex

Fa said:


> - want shorter attack? shorten cc26 attack time (anyway velocity responsive)
> - want shorter tail/resonance? shorten release time.
> - want harsher marcato? rise cc38 attack
> - want pure spiccato? low cc38 attack and keep high velocity + keep duration as short as possible.


“Want such and such, do such and such”. I actually find this style of instruction very useful and straight to the point. Fa, I wonder if you could make up a more elaborate list in this same style of instruction, covering more articulations?

I’m one of those guys who bought this library (quite recently) and haven’t been able to get it to sound as good as some of the better demos out there. I actually bought it mainly for the solo violin in the hope that it could realistically articulate a short exposed cadenza-type of passage that I wrote years ago. Unfortunately, after much tweaking, I was unable to get the Samplemodeling violin to sound right, and ended up using Emotional Violin. Note that I didn’t say the Samplemodeling violin was unable, but that I as a user of Samplemodeling was unable to get it to sound right.

So, as well as the request for a “want this, do this” list, another vote here for dedicated in depth instructional videos to unlock the full potential of this great library.


----------



## I like music

I reckon it'll be released this week, and then all our questions will be answered!

I have no basis for this prediction, but I think I'll be proved right.


----------



## muziksculp

I like music said:


> I reckon it'll be released this week, and then all our questions will be answered!
> 
> I have no basis for this prediction, but I think I'll be proved right.


----------



## DANIELE

I like music said:


> I reckon it'll be released this week, and then all our questions will be answered!
> 
> I have no basis for this prediction, but I think I'll be proved right.


+1 month

No...wait...wrong thread!


----------



## richhickey

Fa said:


> Otherwise I can't get how the examples made by me, Cristian, Leandro and others should be possible: they show that a pretty wide range of common musical articulation variations are definitely possible and convincing.


I appreciate the demos but I don't think they are convincing, given careful listening, and especially not back to back on the same machine with e.g. AudioModeling (far more range, much more convincing sense of on/off string releases), VSL solo strings (far more realistic bowing) etc. The library isn't magical and you can only get so far stretching and crossfading the limited base onset/release sample set and trying to emulate the complex interaction of a bow with many CC curves. I think the additional attacks that you've described in the next version are much needed and I hope they fill this gap somewhat.

SM/AM get a lot of mileage from their smoothly expressive sustain dynamics and variable (if fake lfo) vibrato, vs sample crossfading and fixed recorded vibrato, but suffer by comparison in every other area, especially attacks. I am a customer and a fan of both, and am rooting for them, but this tech isn't done yet. It is a very hard problem.


----------



## DANIELE

Anyway, I don't know if you all know Michelangelo's unfinished works (some of them are here in the Accademia di Belle Arti in Florence, where I live, together with the famous David) but they are really "unfinished" so if this is still the status of the library I have a bad feeling about this week.


----------



## I like music

DANIELE said:


> Anyway, I don't know if you all know Michelangelo's unfinished works (some of them are here in the Accademia di Belle Arti in Florence, where I live, together with the famous David) but they are really "unfinished" so if this is still the status of the library I have a bad feeling about this week.


I may have been far too optimistic!!!


----------



## DANIELE

I like music said:


> I may have been far too optimistic!!!


Just a little bit.


----------



## I like music

DANIELE said:


> Just a little bit.


However, the day's not over yet. @Fa wink if we'll get the library this week!

Or maybe even next week?


----------



## Katznegold

richhickey said:


> I appreciate the demos but I don't think they are convincing, given careful listening, and especially not back to back on the same machine with e.g. AudioModeling (far more range, much more convincing sense of on/off string releases), VSL solo strings (far more realistic bowing) etc. The library isn't magical and you can only get so far stretching and crossfading the limited base onset/release sample set and trying to emulate the complex interaction of a bow with many CC curves. I think the additional attacks that you've described in the next version are much needed and I hope they fill this gap somewhat.
> 
> SM/AM get a lot of mileage from their smoothly expressive sustain dynamics and variable (if fake lfo) vibrato, vs sample crossfading and fixed recorded vibrato, but suffer by comparison in every other area, especially attacks. I am a customer and a fan of both, and am rooting for them, but this tech isn't done yet. It is a very hard problem.


The biggest problem with am swam is that they just sound so synthesized... and that's a deal breaker. IMO their v3 sounds even worse than v2. also their brass instruments. so I'm really crossing my fingers sm s&es will close the gap because it has such a good potential, but a very ambitious one.
no matter how much I tried they couldn't replace sampled strings in my template.


----------



## lychee

Katznegold said:


> The biggest problem with am swam is that they just sound so synthesized... and that's a deal breaker. IMO their v3 sounds even worse than v2. also their brass instruments. so I'm really crossing my fingers sm s&es will close the gap because it has such a good potential, but a very ambitious one.
> no matter how much I tried they couldn't replace sampled strings in my template.


AM Swam is no more synthetic than SM S&ES is, when I use SM's library it sounds synthetic while with others it sounds good.
I also heard awful things under Swam as well as pure wonders, I think that also depends on the skills of the composer and has his ability to tame the beast well.
After I grant you, these two plugins do not sound straight out of the box, they require work.


----------



## lettucehat

Having used both extensively, SM is on a different planet soundwise, though when you get to cello and bass the difference is smaller. We'll see about version 2, I haven't heard anything from AM strings sound anywhere close to as good as the SM v2 demo posted earlier, or the Gardini videos. Or anything that sounds good at all, if I'm being honest... which is a shame, because I like everything else about them, and the winds are incredible.


----------



## Ben H

I still think the hybrid-modeled approach is the better way to go atm. Tone-wise, the SM Strings and Brass sound much better than the AM equivalent. 

Even AM's own woodwinds (which use a hybrid approach), sound better than their pure physically modeled instruments.

Not to disparage AM, I think their instruments are still great, but the tech is not quite there yet. I have no doubt that in time the gap will be narrowed even further, or even be eliminated altogether. 

I mean just look at Pianoteq. It took them 6 revisions before people started saying "wow. now that really sounds like a piano."


----------



## muziksculp

Ben H said:


> Even AM's own woodwinds (which use a hybrid approach), sound better than their pure physically modeled instruments.


I wonder why AM didn't go with a Hybrid approach for their strings ? They surely could have gone Hybrid, but for some reason/s they decided not to.


----------



## chapbot

Ben H said:


> I still think the hybrid-modeled approach is the better way to go atm. Tone-wise, the SM Strings and Brass sound much better than the AM equivalent.
> 
> Even AM's own woodwinds (which use a hybrid approach), sound better than their pure physically modeled instruments.
> 
> Not to disparage AM, I think their instruments are still great, but the tech is not quite there yet. I have no doubt that in time the gap will be narrowed even further, or even be eliminated altogether.
> 
> I mean just look at Pianoteq. It took them 6 revisions before people started saying "wow. now that really sounds like a piano."


And some are still not saying that


----------



## Ben H

chapbot said:


> And some are still not saying that


And some people complain that real instruments don't sound "real enough" when used either. Go figure.


----------



## DANIELE

muziksculp said:


> I wonder why AM didn't go with a Hybrid approach for their strings ? They surely could have gone Hybrid, but for some reason/s they decided not to.


I think they did a full modeled again for two main reasons:

Because they already developed the engine and they didn't have to work from scratch;
Because they are able to give to the user all the controls that the hybrid approach can't.
My two cents.


----------



## muziksculp

DANIELE said:


> I think they did a full modeled again for two main reasons:
> 
> Because they already developed the engine and they didn't have to work from scratch;
> Because they are able to give to the user all the controls that the hybrid approach can't.
> My two cents.


Very possible. 

But I still wonder if they had experimented with using the Hybrid approach for the Strings, and decided it wasn't making a big difference, or they just totally ignored testing the Hybrid approach.


----------



## lychee

I don't have the AM Strings, but I have Reason Friktion, and the pure modeling gives the string instruments another dimension that the hybridization of SM S&ES did not give me.
Maybe it sounds better, but just the positioning of the bow or handling the pressure gives the strings a character that the SM plugin lacks.
I expressed it a bit everywhere on the forum, but for me the sample is obsolete and deserves to be rethought.
I think a hybrid approach like resynthesized sample plus modeling would be a solution, unfortunately I only talked about theory because I have no skills in this area.


----------



## Vardaro

I think re-synthesised samples is/was the basis of Synful Orchestra...
If we replace the chaos of real strings by e.g. layered sine waves, those waves will have to imitate that chaos, and not just for the attacks.


----------



## biomuse

Vardaro said:


> I think re-synthesised samples is/was the basis of Synful Orchestra...
> If we replace the chaos of real strings by e.g. layered sine waves, those waves will have to imitate that chaos, and not just for the attacks.


I still find uses for Synful, which was an example of shockingly forward-thinking design when it was released. The updated horns still sound ”modern” in the right use case, and many other patches still hold up in context. Strings were simultaneously the most surpising in their expressivity and the weakest in sound when released. Low registers were a problem (and to some extent still are in modeling.)


----------



## Vardaro

Perhaps AM reckoned that their "waveguide synthesis" of string behaviour would be more convincing than a hybrid approach. But no mathematical model can match the subliminal chaos of real strings without considerable human intervention.


----------



## Bollen

I've been following the academic research on acoustic modelling for years and as far as I know, we're still decades away from achieving it in real-time due to the absurd computing power required. So I'm not sure what AM is doing, but it's not quite modelling. Mind you, despite the advances and being able to replicate acoustic behaviour pretty accurately, it still doesn't sound like the real thing! So I tend to agree with @Ben H



lychee said:


> I think a hybrid approach like resynthesized sample plus modeling would be a solution


There is a company working on this at the moment with some incredible results! Can't talk about it much yet though...


----------



## Jish

biomuse said:


> I still find uses for Synful, which was an example of shockingly forward-thinking design when it was released. The updated horns still sound ”modern” in the right use case, and many other patches still hold up in context. Strings were simultaneously the most surpising in their expressivity and the weakest in sound when released. Low registers were a problem (and to some extent still are in modeling.)


Yep, spot on- at the time I was kind of blown away by what I was hearing as opposed to only having used (mostly) GPO 2 and the Roland JV-sound expansion card's for an orchestral palette.

I still use it, and absolutely still love some of what it can do. Eric Lindemann was going in a great direction with it but it was also a very different time in the market and any number of factors likely contributed to it never really taking off in the desired fashion. For some of the patches/sounds there is a difficult to describe sense of almost real-time playing going on that really lent credence to an otherwise at-face value, almost gimmicky-sounding, "Reconstructive Phrase Modeling" process that even at the time sounded kind of futuristic silly. Knowing a bit more years later, I only have respect for what Synful was actually doing back in 2005.


----------



## shawnsingh

In defense of AM, I've heard enough demos that have been very realistic and satisfying, even as a violin player myself many years ago. It is, possible to get very realistic and expressive sound. But this does require someone who has mastered the mixing, mastered real-time performance skills with the parameters, or it takes a long time to do post editing MIDI. And in either case I'm guessing the people who can get that realism have to know a good bit about how players actually play the strings instruments. I think often what does not sound realistic about AM is actually weird use of the parameters like incorrect note spacing, not enough variation in dynamics between attack and sustain, etc. Just a disclaimer, this is me supposing based on various demos that do truly sound real to me, I still haven't put much time into either SM or AM myself yet.

In that respect I don't think SM or AM are that much different, it's just a question of what challenges there are for someone to coax a realistic performance out of it, and what kinds of non-realistic artifacts people are willing to tolerate. AM departs more drastically from the workflow that we're all used to with other virtual instruments, so unfortunately its bad side seems to show more often to users.

I do think one big advantage of AM might be that their parameters are more directly related to the way an instrument is played... I think that could be a real advantage in the next generation of strings virtual instruments where developers could try to do more advanced scripting as an abstraction over these low level parameters, so that users can more easily get realistic performances with and easier workflow. At that time, being able to script parameters that represent actually playing the instrument is probably going to be a lot easier to get right.


----------



## Oxytoxine

Very interesting discussion! With regard to how the parameters are more directly linked to the way an instrument is played in AM instruments: maybe I am doing somenthing wrong, but one of the disappointments I had (having them finally under my fingers after being stunned by some demos) is that many parameters do not have the expected influence and only have really subtle effects on what the instrument gives back sonically. E.g. rosin, bow pressure (or similar - not at the DAW at the moment) - I could only hear very small - if any at all - differences. This confused me a lot, and I hope that the "secret sauce" probably is in the matching combination of various parameters to reach the desired effect, as this would also occur during playing a real stringed instrument. What I mean: I can barely hear any difference if moving some of the parameters in isolation while noodling around non-idiomatic phrases, but maybe the magic happens when certain parameters interact in a specific way in the n-dimensional "hyperspace"?

Edit:


What I meant - would what you guys wrote above not basically mean the return of articulations?


Now we can influence abstract physical parameters via CCs, but there are so many - the math is there, but not the computerpower, but it will come. But no one will be able to really govern all the parameters in the required way (there are simply too many), and this would mean that it’s even harder to learn the vst instrument than to play the real thing.


If we now would like to couple certain parameters to realize a certain musical effect / expression („if you want to play this, then parameter a) has to move like that, b) like this etc.) - wouldn’t this be again very similar to what we actually want to avoid - namely something akin to „articulations“?


----------



## CT

shawnsingh said:


> In defense of AM, I've heard enough demos that have been very realistic and satisfying, even as a violin player myself many years ago. It is, possible to get very realistic and expressive sound. But this does require someone who has mastered the mixing, mastered real-time performance skills with the parameters, or it takes a long time to do post editing MIDI. And in either case I'm guessing the people who can get that realism have to know a good bit about how players actually play the strings instruments. I think often what does not sound realistic about AM is actually weird use of the parameters like incorrect note spacing, not enough variation in dynamics between attack and sustain, etc. Just a disclaimer, this is me supposing based on various demos that do truly sound real to me, I still haven't put much time into either SM or AM myself yet.
> 
> In that respect I don't think SM or AM are that much different, it's just a question of what challenges there are for someone to coax a realistic performance out of it, and what kinds of non-realistic artifacts people are willing to tolerate. AM departs more drastically from the workflow that we're all used to with other virtual instruments, so unfortunately its bad side seems to show more often to users.
> 
> I do think one big advantage of AM might be that their parameters are more directly related to the way an instrument is played... I think that could be a real advantage in the next generation of strings virtual instruments where developers could try to do more advanced scripting as an abstraction over these low level parameters, so that users can more easily get realistic performances with and easier workflow. At that time, being able to script parameters that represent actually playing the instrument is probably going to be a lot easier to get right.


Yeah I agree with this. Granted I've not been able to try the Sample Modeling strings myself yet, but my experience with the SWAM demo tells me that the quickest way to an unconvincing sound is to simply use the thing incorrectly. Yes, there's still an inherent, vague fakeness that you can't escape, but as someone with a long-standing skepticism about this type of virtual instrument I've come around to these two companies quite a bit and I think, as with traditional samples, the strengths already, or will very soon, outweigh the weaknesses enough to make them eminently usable in most contexts. There's always room for extraordinary nitpickery, but....


----------



## youngpokie

Oxytoxine said:


> ...many parameters do not have the expected influence and only have really subtle effects on what the instrument gives back sonically. E.g. rosin, bow pressure (or similar - not at the DAW at the moment) - I could only hear very small - if any at all - differences. This confused me a lot, and I hope that the "secret sauce" probably is in the matching combination of various parameters to reach the desired effect


I think this is correct and some of these combinations are not clearly explained. For example, I think Rosin CC behavior corresponds to real life violin behavior: it has to work in combination with bow pressure. Low pressure + low rosin sounds more whispery and dull to me, while high bow presure + high rosin increases the raspyness of the sound even more. At least that's how a real instrument would respond, but I am sometimes wondering if it's just my imagination picking these up and not my ears....

Bow noise (I think you means this one, since bow pressure is very audible) can be heard very well at higher track volume (even at lower expression).

The one case I'm always struggling with is "Attack Ramp Control" CC. The manual says this CC regulates "the steepness of the attacks, when controlled by Note-on Velocity". So I set my Velocity to "Hard" and try to hear the difference in the ramp of the attack. But - nothing....


----------



## muziksculp

Bollen said:


> There is a company working on this at the moment with some incredible results! Can't talk about it much yet though...


That's good news. We need more developers who are on the cutting edge of this tech. 

SM & AM are just two, there is room for many more newcomers to this field.


----------



## lychee

Bollen said:


> There is a company working on this at the moment with some incredible results! Can't talk about it much yet though...


What ???? catch him, torture him, let him reveal everything he knows! 

Seriously, I have the idea that Bollen is under an NDA regarding Soundpaint, and if that's not it, then what is he talking about?
I'm already in stress to wait for what Soundpaint has in store for us, so if another product is waiting for us somewhere, I feel like I'm going to devour all my nails. 



muziksculp said:


> SM & AM are just two, there is room for many more newcomers to this field.



As a fan of "acoustic" instruments that come out of the ordinary rigid sample, I think there are other players in this court.
Syntful (as said above), Wallender, Pianotek, AAS, Sampleson ...

Well, I'll stop the off topic, I think we all forgot that we were on a thread devoted to SM S&ES.


----------



## Bollen

lychee said:


> Seriously, I have the idea that Bollen is under an NDA regarding Soundpaint, and if that's not it, then what is he talking about?


It's not a known company... Yet! It's called Expressive Instruments and their 1st instrument should be out at some point within the next year.


----------



## DANIELE

Bollen said:


> It's not a known company... Yet! It's called Expressive Instruments and their 1st instrument should be out at some point within the next year.


Great, a new player in the world. Are they building "real" instruments (if I may ask)?


----------



## DANIELE

lychee said:


> Soundpaint


I didn't know about it but if I understand correctly it is not a "real" instrument, it is more a synth like one.


----------



## I like music

Bollen said:


> It's not a known company... Yet! It's called Expressive Instruments and their 1st instrument should be out at some point within the next year.


The question is - will it be released before or after the SM strings update?  

Just kidding. Excited for both of course!


----------



## shawnsingh

Oxytoxine said:


> Edit:
> 
> 
> What I meant - would what you guys wrote above not basically mean the return of articulations?
> 
> 
> Now we can influence abstract physical parameters via CCs, but there are so many - the math is there, but not the computerpower, but it will come. But no one will be able to really govern all the parameters in the required way (there are simply too many), and this would mean that it’s even harder to learn the vst instrument than to play the real thing.
> 
> 
> If we now would like to couple certain parameters to realize a certain musical effect / expression („if you want to play this, then parameter a) has to move like that, b) like this etc.) - wouldn’t this be again very similar to what we actually want to avoid - namely something akin to „articulations“?


The best workflows I've encountered from various virtual instruments are the EWQL Hollywood series and the Infinite series. Actually what I like about them is also possible with VSL Synchron player and OT Capsule/Sine poly mode, and even just setting up kontakt multis in the right way, for those really serious to customize their own "combi" patches. The idea is that you can get a surprisingly rich set of controls from just note velocity, duration, and just a few CCs, often dynamics and vibrato. A large variety of attacks can be achieved by a combination of note velocity and various shapes of dynamics CC. Sustains can be brought to life with dynamics and vibrato. Release styles have received less attention but I think can be part of the future.

At some point with Hollywood series I found my thought process to be like: set the "playing style" or "articulation set" with one key switch, and then use more velocity + 2 CCs to perform within that.

Really, in the sampled world, these combi patches still are more limited because attacks are baked in to the various articulations. I'm personally very excited about bringing this workflow idea to modeled instruments - "keyswitch between playing styles or articulation sets". Scripting can use the playing style to change the behavior of various low level parameters. 

Flautando for example - low bow pressure, more sul tasto, but now imagine you can still do shorts, legato, and some degree of dynamics and vibrato - something that is quite costly to achieve in the sampling world. 

Or switch to an aggressive playing style and the script favors more immediate or accented attacks, but you still can achieve shorts, legatos, and crunchy special accents on specific notes, all without another keyswitch. Using the extensive mileage of note velocity + 2 CCs, but with underlying parameters favoring the more aggressive tone.

There's room for a million ideas in the details of how abstraction would work... But ultimately I really believe this kind of abstraction on top of scripting will be the tipping point where modeled instruments can finally begin to grab serious attention compared to mainstream sampled libraries. They'll have a powerful combination of fast, musical minded workflow combined with supremely expressive but streamlined reduced controls, all without requiring users to be skillful performers.


----------



## AndyP

shawnsingh said:


> The best workflows I've encountered from various virtual instruments are the EWQL Hollywood series and the Infinite series. Actually what I like about them is also possible with VSL Synchron player and OT Capsule/Sine poly mode, and even just setting up kontakt multis in the right way, for those really serious to customize their own "combi" patches. The idea is that you can get a surprisingly rich set of controls from just note velocity, duration, and just a few CCs, often dynamics and vibrato. A large variety of attacks can be achieved by a combination of note velocity and various shapes of dynamics CC. Sustains can be brought to life with dynamics and vibrato. Release styles have received less attention but I think can be part of the future.
> 
> At some point with Hollywood series I found my thought process to be like: set the "playing style" or "articulation set" with one key switch, and then use more velocity + 2 CCs to perform within that.
> 
> Really, in the sampled world, these combi patches still are more limited because attacks are baked in to the various articulations. I'm personally very excited about bringing this workflow idea to modeled instruments - "keyswitch between playing styles or articulation sets". Scripting can use the playing style to change the behavior of various low level parameters.
> 
> Flautando for example - low bow pressure, more sul tasto, but now imagine you can still do shorts, legato, and some degree of dynamics and vibrato - something that is quite costly to achieve in the sampling world.
> 
> Or switch to an aggressive playing style and the script favors more immediate or accented attacks, but you still can achieve shorts, legatos, and crunchy special accents on specific notes, all without another keyswitch. Using the extensive mileage of note velocity + 2 CCs, but with underlying parameters favoring the more aggressive tone.
> 
> There's room for a million ideas in the details of how abstraction would work... But ultimately I really believe this kind of abstraction on top of scripting will be the tipping point where modeled instruments can finally begin to grab serious attention compared to mainstream sampled libraries. They'll have a powerful combination of fast, musical minded workflow combined with supremely expressive but streamlined reduced controls, all without requiring users to be skillful performers.


Different performance sets that can be switched by keyswitch I think is a great idea!


----------



## Oxytoxine

shawnsingh said:


> The best workflows I've encountered from various virtual instruments are the EWQL Hollywood series and the Infinite series. Actually what I like about them is also possible with VSL Synchron player and OT Capsule/Sine poly mode, and even just setting up kontakt multis in the right way, for those really serious to customize their own "combi" patches. The idea is that you can get a surprisingly rich set of controls from just note velocity, duration, and just a few CCs, often dynamics and vibrato. A large variety of attacks can be achieved by a combination of note velocity and various shapes of dynamics CC. Sustains can be brought to life with dynamics and vibrato. Release styles have received less attention but I think can be part of the future.
> 
> At some point with Hollywood series I found my thought process to be like: set the "playing style" or "articulation set" with one key switch, and then use more velocity + 2 CCs to perform within that.
> 
> Really, in the sampled world, these combi patches still are more limited because attacks are baked in to the various articulations. I'm personally very excited about bringing this workflow idea to modeled instruments - "keyswitch between playing styles or articulation sets". Scripting can use the playing style to change the behavior of various low level parameters.
> 
> Flautando for example - low bow pressure, more sul tasto, but now imagine you can still do shorts, legato, and some degree of dynamics and vibrato - something that is quite costly to achieve in the sampling world.
> 
> Or switch to an aggressive playing style and the script favors more immediate or accented attacks, but you still can achieve shorts, legatos, and crunchy special accents on specific notes, all without another keyswitch. Using the extensive mileage of note velocity + 2 CCs, but with underlying parameters favoring the more aggressive tone.
> 
> There's room for a million ideas in the details of how abstraction would work... But ultimately I really believe this kind of abstraction on top of scripting will be the tipping point where modeled instruments can finally begin to grab serious attention compared to mainstream sampled libraries. They'll have a powerful combination of fast, musical minded workflow combined with supremely expressive but streamlined reduced controls, all without requiring users to be skillful performers.


Fantastic writeup and cool ideas! 

I am ordering a cryofreezer now - please wake me up to life again if this kind of modeled instruments will be released 😊


----------



## Katznegold

Jish said:


> Yep, spot on- at the time I was kind of blown away by what I was hearing as opposed to only having used (mostly) GPO 2 and the Roland JV-sound expansion card's for an orchestral palette.
> 
> I still use it, and absolutely still love some of what it can do. Eric Lindemann was going in a great direction with it but it was also a very different time in the market and any number of factors likely contributed to it never really taking off in the desired fashion. For some of the patches/sounds there is a difficult to describe sense of almost real-time playing going on that really lent credence to an otherwise at-face value, almost gimmicky-sounding, "Reconstructive Phrase Modeling" process that even at the time sounded kind of futuristic silly. Knowing a bit more years later, I only have respect for what Synful was actually doing back in 2005.


First time I'm hearing about Synful and I just checked out some demos.. holy crap! it's unbelievable considering it's age, and it will layer NICELY with SM. their room simulation is by far the best I've heard in modeled instruments, it's gorgeous. too bad it's so expensive


----------



## Bollen

DANIELE said:


> Great, a new player in the world. Are they building "real" instruments (if I may ask)?


Whatchooo mean by "real"? If you mean actual acoustic instruments, then yes! The 1st will be a saxophone.



I like music said:


> The question is - will it be released before or after the SM strings update?
> 
> Just kidding. Excited for both of course!


After, guaranteed!


----------



## tabulius

Katznegold said:


> First time I'm hearing about Synful and I just checked out some demos.. holy crap! it's unbelievable considering it's age, and it will layer NICELY with SM. their room simulation is by far the best I've heard in modeled instruments, it's gorgeous. too bad it's so expensive


The product links are dead and long gone. I did test the trial back in the day and it was an impressive product for sure.


----------



## muziksculp

2.01 Update ?


----------



## DANIELE

Bollen said:


> Whatchooo mean by "real"? If you mean actual acoustic instruments, then yes! The 1st will be a saxophone.


I mean exactly that, I was asking if they are aiming to do acoustic instruments like strings, brass, woodwinds etc...

Are they aiming to build the entire orchestra (after the saxophone)?


----------



## I like music

muziksculp said:


> 2.01 Update ?


Aaaaahhh! So frustrating that they won't give a rough date! I'd rather they gave a date and missed it by the time a year than not give one at all


----------



## Bollen

DANIELE said:


> I mean exactly that, I was asking if they are aiming to do acoustic instruments like strings, brass, woodwinds etc...
> 
> Are they aiming to build the entire orchestra (after the saxophone)?


Yup! Every single one...


----------



## DANIELE

Bollen said:


> Yup! Every single one...


Ok then, I have to prepare my wallet for this. Now that I know this I have a lot of time to prepare myself.


----------



## Bollen

DANIELE said:


> Now that I know this I have a lot of time to prepare myself.


A LOT of time.... Decades perhaps...


----------



## DANIELE

Bollen said:


> A LOT of time.... Decades perhaps...


OMG, I will play with them in the afterlife then...


----------



## lettucehat

Bollen said:


> It's not a known company... Yet! It's called Expressive Instruments and their 1st instrument should be out at some point within the next year.


This is distinct from the company Expressive E that has modeled strings already?


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

I like music said:


> Aaaaahhh! So frustrating that they won't give a rough date! I'd rather they gave a date and missed it by the time a year than not give one at all


2021. :emoji_alien:


----------



## muziksculp

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> 2021. :emoji_alien:


LOL... At least we now know the Year


----------



## Bollen

lettucehat said:


> This is distinct from the company Expressive E that has modeled strings already?


You really scared me there, but the answer is no. The instruments will not be modelled, they will be sample based, but with a new technology that permits transitions on par with modelling, but it will also be possible to access every single sound and noise the real instrument can do! So no more stylistic limitations...


----------



## shawnsingh

No, not distinct? Or no, not the same?


----------



## muziksculp

Bollen said:


> The instruments will not be modelled, they will be sample based, but with a new technology that permits transitions on par with modelling, but it will also be possible to access every single sound and noise the real instrument can do! So no more stylistic limitations...


Interesting. Always excited to hear about new technologies in the sampling/modeling area of virtual instruments. Is this expected to be out this year, or during this century ?


----------



## DANIELE

muziksculp said:


> Interesting. Always excited to hear about new technologies in the sampling/modeling area of virtual instruments. Is this expected to be out this year, or during this century ?


According to Bollen you will be able to have them in 2040 or maybe 2050. We can only guess, but I think they will come out before 2100.


----------



## Bollen

shawnsingh said:


> No, not distinct? Or no, not the same?


Not the same company nor the same approach. Company's not active yet, so no point Googling it...


muziksculp said:


> Is this expected to be out this year, or during this century ?


It was expected last March/April, then got moved to September, then to December and now we're just hoping it will be at some point next year.... It's the problem when you're creating something completely new, it's impossible to really say until you have a point of reference... sigh!


----------



## muziksculp

Bollen said:


> It was expected last March/April, then got moved to September, then to December and now we're just hoping it will be at some point next year.... It's the problem when you're creating something completely new, it's impossible to really say until you have a point of reference... sigh!


THANKS. 

So, this is a new company, and this will be their first library release ?


----------



## DANIELE

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> 2021. :emoji_alien:


31/12/2021


----------



## CT

Bollen said:


> It was expected last March/April, then got moved to September, then to December and now we're just hoping it will be at some point next year.... It's the problem when you're creating something completely new, it's impossible to really say until you have a point of reference... sigh!


Hmm... this sounds awfully familiar. I wonder if I know what you're talking about....


----------



## Bollen

muziksculp said:


> So, this is a new company, and this will be their first library release ?


Yep!


----------



## I like music

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> 2021. :emoji_alien:


Amazing, thank you 

Now, to my next question ...

Haha, just kidding. Wishing you the best in the final phases of development and release!


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

DANIELE said:


> 31/12/2021


before that. 


I like music said:


> Amazing, thank you
> 
> Now, to my next question ...
> 
> Haha, just kidding. Wishing you the best in the final phases of development and release!


Thank you, I like music


----------



## muziksculp

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> before that.


30/12/21 ?


----------



## DANIELE

muziksculp said:


> 30/12/21 ?


I have a strategy, now we will do a countdown until Giorgio says "before that", when he starts to say "that" or maybe "after that" we will have a date. 

I'm so smart. 

You know I love you Giorgio.


----------



## muziksculp

DANIELE said:


> I have a strategy, now we will do a countdown until Giorgio says "before that", when he starts to say "that" or maybe "after that" we will have a date.
> 
> I'm so smart.
> 
> You know I love you Giorgio.


Yes that's a Super Smart Strategy.


----------



## I like music

muziksculp said:


> Yes that's a Super Smart Strategy.


He has a better counter-strategy. He will simply laugh react your comment ... !!!


----------



## DANIELE

This saturday is my birthday...just saying...


----------



## Ben H

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> 2021. :emoji_alien:


Soon?


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

Ben H said:


> Soon?


ASAP.


----------



## DANIELE

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> ASAP.


October 13th is my wedding anniversary, just saying....

or

October 20th is my brother's birthday, just saying...


----------



## leon chevalier

@Giorgio Tommasini 
Sorry to be that annoying fanboy, but any plans for woodwinds ? 
🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

leon chevalier said:


> @Giorgio Tommasini
> Sorry to be that annoying fanboy, but any plans for woodwinds ?
> 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏


Thanks for asking, Leon, but no plans for woodwinds for the time being.


----------



## pierrevigneron

What means ASAP for the little french i am ? 😔


----------



## DANIELE

pierrevigneron said:


> What means ASAP for the little french i am ? 😔


As Soon As Possible.


----------



## pierrevigneron

Thanks Daniele ! 

Glad to hear it ^^. If the update is up to par (which seems to be the case) I think I will be able to do a little cleaning on my hard drive ^^


----------



## muziksculp

Hi,

While we wait for the next SM Solo & Ens. Strings update, I was curious if the SM solo violin can be used for playing fiddle style phrases, i.e. Folk, Bluegrass, Irish Jigs, ..etc. ? 

I know there are specialized Fiddle libraries, that offer the suitable articulations/ornaments for specific Fiddle genres, but I was curious of these more classical violins can be adapted for making Fiddle style phrases/music. 

I'm also wondering if Audio Modeling's Violin V3 can be used for this type of genre as well ? 

Has anyone attempted to emulate Fiddle style music with any of these instruments ? 

Thanks,
Muziksculp


----------



## leon chevalier

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> Thanks for asking, Leon, but no plans for woodwinds for the time being.


Thanks for the reply Giorgio !
(😭😭😭😭😭😭😭)


----------



## Ben H

I wonder what they're working on next, if not woodwinds? Percussion perhaps? Period instruments? Ethnic?


----------



## muziksculp

I hope they change their minds about not developing woodwinds in the future. It makes a lot of sense to see Sample Modeling Woodwinds developed in the future. Just my humble opinion about this. 

Meanwhile, improving their current libraries might be their main focus. Which is a good thing. 

Looking forward to SM Solo & Ens. Strings update whenever it's ready for release.


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

muziksculp said:


> I hope they change their minds about not developing woodwinds in the future. It makes a lot of sense to see Sample Modeling Woodwinds developed in the future. Just my humble opinion about this.
> 
> Meanwhile, improving their current libraries might be their main focus. Which is a good thing.
> 
> Looking forward to SM Solo & Ens. Strings update whenever it's ready for release.


Thanks for understanding. Improving Solo & Ensemble Strings and adding Chamber Strings, are now our priority. I can assure you all that this work is overwhelming. After completing this task, anything is possible. But I don't want to raise expectations if I'm not sure they will be fulfilled. It's a question of respect. I do respect and love you all, for taking your time to inquire about Samplemodeling's plans.


----------



## muziksculp

I keep forgetting that the next SM Solo & Ens. Strings will add *Chamber Strings*, I don't think there was any demo posted of the Chamber Strings yet, so surely looking forward to hear them when they are ready to showoff.


----------



## chapbot

muziksculp said:


> I keep forgetting that the next SM Solo & Ens. Strings will add *Chamber Strings*, I don't think there was any demo posted of the Chamber Strings yet, so surely looking forward to hear them when they are ready to showoff.


Whas there any time frame mentioned for the chamber strings or is it all wishful thinking?


----------



## I like music

chapbot said:


> Whas there any time frame mentioned for the chamber strings or is it all wishful thinking?


I understood it to be the case that these would be a part of the next update. And that update will be here this year. I might be wrong, though.

Exactly when, only one man can answer, and he's being very consistent in not giving away anything more specific than 2021. Unless he's feeling generous tonight and can tell us @Giorgio Tommasini


----------



## DANIELE

chapbot said:


> Whas there any time frame mentioned for the chamber strings or is it all wishful thinking?


It was mentioned by Fa in an earlier post, the new update will feature chamber strings to fill the gap between solo strings and ensemble strings.


----------



## muziksculp

I'm hoping that Sample Modeling will post some instructional videos showing the upcoming Solo & Ens. Strings update in action, and provide us with detailed walkthrough of how best to use the new features, I also feel that posting additional helpful-tips videos will be very handy for users of this library.


----------



## Ben H

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> Thanks for understanding. Improving Solo & Ensemble Strings and adding Chamber Strings, are now our priority. I can assure you all that this work is overwhelming. After completing this task, anything is possible. But I don't want to raise expectations if I'm not sure they will be fulfilled. It's a question of respect. I do respect and love you all, for taking your time to inquire about Samplemodeling's plans.


Sorry if it feels like we are busting your chops sometimes, Giorgio. We are just very excited about what the future brings! 

Have a great day.


----------



## I like music

Ben H said:


> Sorry if it feels like we are busting your chops sometimes, Giorgio. We are just very excited about what the future brings!
> 
> Have a great day.


Exactly! I hope Giorgio sees this as just mere excitement. I don't have any burning expectations, and I'm sure it gets very tiring for developers when people keep pinging them about release dates and products.

But some of us are creatures of habit, and so I must ask, for @DANIELE's cousin's cousin's uncle's friend's colleague's birthday's sake, are the strings being released in or before December @Giorgio Tommasini ?


----------



## I like music

Any demos imminent? 😉


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

I like music said:


> Any demos imminent? 😉


yes


----------



## DANIELE

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> yes


Any update imminent?


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

DANIELE said:


> Any update imminent?


Yes, in 2021


----------



## muziksculp

*Sample Modeling Solo & Ensemble Strings version 2* is one of the most exciting upcoming updates that I'm looking forward to, I get the impression it's like we are going to get a new library, not just an update. The demo posted on Vimeo of the String Quartet using ver 2.01 of the Solo Strings is jaw dropping. I don't think the current version can even get close to what I heard.

Exciting few weeks ahead of us in 2021. 

Here is that video again.


----------



## I like music

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> Yes, in 2021


Ah, amazing!!! The best of luck with the release and hoping all goes smoothly for you.


----------



## muziksculp

Now that we know that ver. 2.01 has significantly improved the Solo Strings of the library, I wonder if they will post a video showing if the same has been done for the Ensembles ?


----------



## NeonMediaKJT

nice!


----------



## FireGS

muziksculp said:


> *Sample Modeling Solo & Ensemble Strings version 2* is one of the most exciting upcoming updates that I'm looking forward to, I get the impression it's like we are going to get a new library, not just an update. The demo posted on Vimeo of the String Quartet using ver 2.01 of the Solo Strings is jaw dropping. I don't think the current version can even get close to what I heard.
> 
> Exciting few weeks ahead of us in 2021.
> 
> Here is that video again.



uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

whoa. I hadn't seen that before... and damn, I was literally just visiting Genoa earlier this week. @Giorgio Tommasini are you still there??


----------



## Tralen

If they ever release a Woodwinds library, then I'm all set.

The strings in the current form already replaced everything I had.


----------



## muziksculp

Tralen said:


> The strings in the current form already replaced everything I had.


I hope I can say that when version 2.01 of their solo & ens. strings is released. For now, that hasn't been the case for me.


----------



## Tralen

Bollen said:


> Whatchooo mean by "real"? If you mean actual acoustic instruments, then yes! The 1st will be a saxophone.


Very excited to hear someone is working on a new quasi-modeled saxophone. The fact that the saxophone is their first makes me really hopeful that it will be well made.


----------



## DANIELE

Tralen said:


> The strings in the current form already replaced everything I had


Same for me with some little exceptions in the advanced techniques where their strings need some improvement. I'm excited too for the release of this big update, hoping that they solved the very few flaws the 1.2b actually has.


----------



## Ben H

Tralen said:


> Very excited to hear someone is working on a new quasi-modeled saxophone. The fact that the saxophone is their first makes me really hopeful that it will be well made.


So that's 2 new companies working on modeled saxes then!

"Expressive Instruments," the new company that @Bollen has been talking about, and also apparently AcousticSamples, the company behind the recent VHorns Brass Section.



muziksculp said:


> Exciting few weeks ahead of us in 2021.
> 
> Here is that video again.



I can't wait!


----------



## muziksculp

We also have SWAM Saxes V3 just released recently.


----------



## Ben H

muziksculp said:


> We also have SWAM Saxes V3 just released recently.


Indeed.


----------



## I like music

muziksculp said:


> We also have SWAM Saxes V3 just released recently.


Don't lose focus Muziksculp! We are all relying on you to push these guys on our behalf so that we have news immediately on the strings. No one likes saxophones anyway!


----------



## Consona

Ensembles demo?


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

FireGS said:


> uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
> 
> whoa. I hadn't seen that before... and damn, I was literally just visiting Genoa earlier this week. @Giorgio Tommasini are you still there??


yes


----------



## Nando Florestan

That's gotta be a record of likes on a monosyllabic comment...


----------



## I like music

Fair to assume that it will be released in time for/ahead of BF so that the update can be used to court new buyers.

I therefore feel we'll have our demos and a release in the next couple of weeks.


----------



## DANIELE

I like music said:


> Fair to assume that it will be released in time for/ahead of BF so that the update can be used to court new buyers.
> 
> I therefore feel we'll have our demos and a release in the next couple of weeks.


We know for sure that the update will not be released on 31 december 2021.


----------



## Vlzmusic

I wonder how SM strings users feel about solo vs ensembles side of things? As I am diving into demos and comparisons, I kinda like the ensemble usage of SM much more...?


----------



## RogiervG

too much yappi;'n too less audio here..


----------



## I like music

RogiervG said:


> too much yappi;'n too less audio here..


Two days have passed, and still nothing


----------



## Ivan Duch

Vlzmusic said:


> I wonder how SM strings users feel about solo vs ensembles side of things? As I am diving into demos and comparisons, I kinda like the ensemble usage of SM much more...?


I tend to find more use for the ensembles. I have issues making the solo instruments sound convincing. I mostly struggle with the vibrato, some legatos and the shorts.


----------



## muziksculp

Ivan Duch said:


> I tend to find more use for the ensembles. I have issues making the solo instruments sound convincing. I mostly struggle with the vibrato, some legatos and the shorts.


Hopefully both Solo & Ensembles have been greatly improved in ver. 2.01


----------



## I like music

Guess we'll know in a couple of weeks!


----------



## decredis

I'm having an odd thing happening with the "Portamento time" settings screen (on solo viola), the one with "Portamento time controlled by" and a knob for percentage velocity control and a knob for percentage CC15 control. 

What's happening is that these knobs keep setting themselves to different values, both during a session and between closing and reopening a session. I have it set to 100% velocity control but the knobs keep shifting.

It's probably something obvious but I can't figure it out. I don't see any way to control those knobs by automation and I don't seem to be sending any irrelevant automation data on that track anyway.

Any ideas?


----------



## Nando Florestan

Whenever that happens to me, it's either that MIDI messages from another instrument got forwarded to the wrong instrument for some reason, or I bumped onto my MIDI controller. When this kind of thing happens, do check the basics. I mean the basics. Is your computer connected to the outlet?


----------



## decredis

Nando Florestan said:


> Whenever that happens to me, it's either that MIDI messages from another instrument got forwarded to the wrong instrument for some reason, or I bumped onto my MIDI controller. When this kind of thing happens, do check the basics. I mean the basics. Is your computer connected to the outlet?


Many thanks for reply... I don't seem to have any MIDI sends going from other tracks to the Viola. Not sure what you mean by "the outlet" here?

But regardless, I don't know that the parameters being altered are even midi-controllable. That's what's most confusing me. These two knobs... if I turn them with "write automation" enabled, nothing gets written. If I right click these knobs (unlike other knobs in the interface), I don't get an option to MIDI learn. So I'm not sure how stray midi data could be nudging them.


----------



## Cristian Labelli

Hi all 

Here's another mock-up I've been working on during the last weeks! I used Samplemodeling Solo&Ensemble strings v. 2.01

You will hear an excerpt from Korngold, String Quartet No.2

Your feedback is highly appreciated!


----------



## Batrawi

Cristian Labelli said:


> Hi all
> 
> Here's another mock-up I've been working on during the last weeks! I used Samplemodeling Solo&Ensemble strings v. 2.01
> 
> You will hear an excerpt from Korngold, String Quartet No.2
> 
> Your feedback is highly appreciated!



great mockup skill. for the sound, i hear some nasality/lack of instrument body here and there but overall it sounds like a good improvement over earlier versions. I sold my license some time ago but I will likely buy it again as the tone evolves with the updates. following closely


----------



## Jish

Cristian Labelli said:


> You will hear an excerpt from Korngold, String Quartet No.2
> 
> Your feedback is highly appreciated!


This is a fine mockup Cristian, as are the others- I agree with Batrawi above, there is a somewhat nasal characteristic going on at times, however, it's noteworthy that unlike Version 1, it never really took me 'out' of the piece overall. The solo's really seem to be starting to come to life.

Would be very interested to hear how this new upcoming version would make your previous 'Cinema Paradiso' mockup sound- in part as I am interested to hear the updated ensembles in action as well.


----------



## DANIELE

Cristian Labelli said:


> Hi all
> 
> Here's another mock-up I've been working on during the last weeks! I used Samplemodeling Solo&Ensemble strings v. 2.01
> 
> You will hear an excerpt from Korngold, String Quartet No.2
> 
> Your feedback is highly appreciated!



I love the overall and I also hear the improvements, I'd like to listen to the ensembles though. I agree about the little nasality of the sound, it is like it is missing some low end but I also must say that there is only one cello and she doesn't have a big part here. I love the sharpness of the sound and I think this is a really good mockup.

EDIT

Here's a real performance for comparison (even if it is a little bit faster):




By listening at this I must say that the SM one is really really near to the real one.


----------



## eli0s

Cristian Labelli said:


> Hi all
> 
> Here's another mock-up I've been working on during the last weeks! I used Samplemodeling Solo&Ensemble strings v. 2.01
> 
> You will hear an excerpt from Korngold, String Quartet No.2
> 
> Your feedback is highly appreciated!



Amazing expressiveness and the plucked sound is hugely improved from version 1 demos!

As mentioned above, the sound is... weird... I will not describe it as nasal, it sounds like it is out of faze and there are conflicting frequencies which cancel each other, causing a strange, thin-metalic sound.
I get the same feeling when listening MSS through their convolution reverb engine... I believe it's an artifact that comes inherently when super dry samples get their "body" and room/placement treatment with body/room emulation techniques...


----------



## DANIELE

eli0s said:


> Amazing expressiveness and the plucked sound is hugely improved from version 1 demos!
> 
> As mentioned above, the sound is... weird... I will not describe it as nasal, it sounds like it is out of faze and there are conflicting frequencies which cancel each other, causing a strange, thin-metalic sound.
> I get the same feeling when listening MSS through their convolution reverb engine... I believe it's an artifact that comes inherently when super dry samples get their "body" and room/placement treatment with body/room emulation techniques...


We should pay attention to the fact that the overtones knob has been used here and it certainly contributes to the final sound.


----------



## I like music

I hear a lot of tone improvement, I think. Sounds good to me! Good progress by the team .

Also very nice job on the mockup itself.

Curious if you have any ensemble demos coming


----------



## biomuse

How does this tech handle repetitive ostinati, repeated notes generally? Is there enough variation possible from note to note to keep it sounding plausible?


----------



## Robert Kooijman

Well, in my humble opinion the Sample Modeling Solo & Ensemble strings v. 2.01 Korngold mockup is really well done and sounds great including the hall / room. Prefer it even over the real, slightly faster performance


----------



## DANIELE

I like music said:


> I hear a lot of tone improvement, I think. Sounds good to me! Good progress by the team .
> 
> Also very nice job on the mockup itself.
> 
> Curious if you have any ensemble demos coming



I have a better idea, they drop the update and we compose all the demos you want! 



biomuse said:


> How does this tech handle repetitive ostinati, repeated notes generally? Is there enough variation possible from note to note to keep it sounding plausible?


I used it a lot for repetitive ostinato and it performs very well, you can work on a lot of parameters and this new update should give you more control and better results.


----------



## muziksculp

@Cristian Labelli ,

Your Korngold quartet demo sounds amazing.

Thanks for sharing it with us. 

Regarding some of the comments posted about this demo having some nasal quality, I think you can tweak these instruments quite a bit to your taste via their timbral shaping feature, I'm also guessing they have done some major tweaking/improvements to this feature in ver. 2.01. . also the way this was mixed, reverb used, EQ, ...etc can change the characteristics of the mix quite a bit.

I'm eager to hear how much of an improvement ver. 2.01 has on the Ensembles ? 

I also noticed the Pizz. Cello sounds much better, I was never able to use the Pizz. in ver. 1. They were not usable for me.


----------



## muziksculp

Oh... I also wonder if they have changed the GUI in ver. 2.01 or no changes have done to the GUI ?


----------



## DANIELE

muziksculp said:


> @Cristian Labelli ,
> 
> Your Korngold quartet demo sounds amazing.
> 
> Thanks for sharing it with us.
> 
> Regarding some of the comments posted about this demo having some nasal quality, I think you can tweak these instruments quite a bit to your taste via their timbral shaping feature, I'm also guessing they have done some major tweaking/improvements to this feature in ver. 2.01. . also the way this was mixed, reverb used, EQ, ...etc can change the characteristics of the mix quite a bit.
> 
> I'm eager to hear how much of an improvement ver. 2.01 has on the Ensembles ?
> 
> I also noticed the Pizz. Cello sounds much better, I was never able to use the Pizz. in ver. 1. They were not usable for me.


I agree with you, I think the same, this is why I need the update to test it in my enviroment. I'm sure that everyone could shape the sound to his liking since the solos have been really improved from 1.2b.

I also agree about the pizz sound, I hope that the "Col Legno" articulation received the same attention, I'm particularly interested in the dynamic range of these special techniques as I love to use some pianissimo Col Legno sometimes.


----------



## Bollen

biomuse said:


> How does this tech handle repetitive ostinati, repeated notes generally? Is there enough variation possible from note to note to keep it sounding plausible?


In my experience it's their biggest flaw, that and the lack of some decent scratchy attacks... I still need to use other libraries to compliment this one and the many things it's missing.


----------



## muziksculp

Bollen said:


> In my experience it's their biggest flaw, that and the lack of some decent scratchy attacks... I still need to use other libraries to compliment this one and the many things it's missing.


I agree, and hopefully this upcoming update finally fixes that. I'm sure they were reading our comments, and wishes on VI-C, and did not ignore them.


----------



## biomuse

Bollen said:


> In my experience it's their biggest flaw, that and the lack of some decent scratchy attacks... I still need to use other libraries to compliment this one and the many things it's missing.


Yikes. So in other words, if you rock back and forth on an interval, you start to hear the Sameys (aka Machine-gun 2.0) creeping in?

It's a tough nut to crack for any approach to strings that doesn't record the ostinati themselves. It does seem as though with this technology there should be enough degrees of freedom to implement a performance repeat legato or ostinato "mode," but it might need to be a dedicated mode that would judiciously apply sample pool variation and LFOs in all the right places.


----------



## Bollen

biomuse said:


> Yikes. So in other words, if you rock back and forth on an interval, you start to hear the Sameys (aka Machine-gun 2.0) creeping in?
> 
> It's a tough nut to crack for any approach to strings that doesn't record the ostinati themselves. It does seem as though with this technology there should be enough degrees of freedom to implement a performance repeat legato or ostinato "mode," but it might need to be a dedicated mode that would judiciously apply sample pool variation and LFOs in all the right places.


Back and forth is less of an issue, because subtle differences in CC11 and velocity will give you variation. But if you're repeating the same note it does sound very machine gun like...


----------



## muziksculp

Do you use the Detache mode for playing repeated Ostianti-Legato style bowing ? I think it's triggered via the Sustain-Pedal CC 64. Playing with variable velocities should provide the variety to not get a machine gun effect. I'm just trying to remember this detail.


----------



## AlbertSmithers

Cristian Labelli said:


> Hi all
> 
> Here's another mock-up I've been working on during the last weeks! I used Samplemodeling Solo&Ensemble strings v. 2.01
> 
> You will hear an excerpt from Korngold, String Quartet No.2
> 
> Your feedback is highly appreciated!



I think the viola and lower strings sound great in this, definitely an improvement over V1 overall (which was already awesome to begin with).

I do feel like I can hear some nasalness in the violin, and I've attached some files below to try and illustrate this - this is using sample modeling V1, where I feel the nasaly sound is a bit similar.

- In the first file, I attached an mp3 showing the Samplemodeling Violin V1 sound out of the box (with expression at 77.2, and reverb disabled).
View attachment SampleModelingOutOfBoxDry.mp3


- In the second file, I attached an mp3 with Samplemodeling Violin V1 sound but tweaked (also no reverb and expression at 77.2).
View attachment SampleModelingTweakedDry.mp3








(And vibrato delay is set to 37)

- In the third file, I attached an mp3 of Cinematic Studio Solo Strings playing the same notes, with the close mics (Violin 1 solo).
View attachment CinematicStudioSoloStringsClose.mp3


It feels like in the CSSS violin, the tone is a bit less 'intense' if that makes any sense, like I can hear the wood echo of the instrument almost. (That said, it could just be the reverb from the CSSS room).

I hope this feedback is helpful and thanks for all that you do!


----------



## Bollen

muziksculp said:


> Do you use the Detache mode for playing repeated Ostianti-Legato style bowing ? I think it's triggered via the Sustain-Pedal CC 64. Playing with variable velocities should provide the variety to not get a machine gun effect. I'm just trying to remember this detail.


Well here's a quick comparison, btw the detache just makes things worse:

This is SM with exaggerated differences in velocities, some overtone variation and attack intensity at maximum.
View attachment SM.mp3


This CH for comparison
View attachment CH.mp3


VSL
View attachment VSL.mp3


And just for fun a rare one that I particularly like the scratchy attack:
View attachment Ircam.mp3


----------



## muziksculp

Bollen said:


> Well here's a quick comparison, btw the detache just makes things worse:
> 
> This is SM with exaggerated differences in velocities, some overtone variation and attack intensity at maximum.
> View attachment SM.mp3
> 
> 
> This CH for comparison
> View attachment CH.mp3
> 
> 
> VSL
> View attachment VSL.mp3
> 
> 
> And just for fun a rare one that I particularly like the scratchy attack:
> View attachment Ircam.mp3


Yes, as we can hear the SM Solo Violin lacks a nice, crunchy sounding bow attack, even at the highest velocities. Hopefully this is improved in ver 2.01

By the way, none of these demos have a legato-detache character, they are purely detache, up/down bows, but not played legato. I suggested the Detach via Sustain pedal in SM for a more legato-detache bowing result (If that is what is needed). But then you lose the more defined bow attacks on the up and down bowing changes. But that's what legato does, it masks the sound of those bow attacks, since it's played as smooth as possible, when changing bow direction.


----------



## Bollen

muziksculp said:


> Yes, as we can hear the SM Solo Violin lacks a nice, crunchy sounding bow attack, even at the highest velocities. Hopefully this is improved in ver 2.01
> 
> By the way, none of these demos have a legato-detache character, they are purely detache, up/down bows, but not played legato. I suggested the Detach via Sustain pedal in SM for a more legato-detache bowing result (If that is what is needed). But then you lose the more defined bow attacks on the up and down bowing changes. But that's what legato does, it masks the sound of those bow attacks, since it's played as smooth as possible, when changing bow direction.


That's a funny statement to make to a musician (both a string and wind player) since detache is the very opposite of legato: legato = tied together, bound; whereas detache = detached, separate. In string writing a detache is _supposed_ to be a re-articulating of the note without changing bow direction, sometimes written with staccato and a slur above or other times combining tenuto and staccato. SM doesn't do this, instead it applies bow changes. To me personally it would not be a big deal if we had enough variations in the retrigger of the note, since a true detache and bow change is only perceivable in how close the notes are played, which you can achieve with the release knob.


----------



## Tralen

Bollen said:


> SM doesn't do this, instead it applies bow changes. To me personally it would not be a big deal if we had enough variations in the retrigger of the note, since a true detache and bow change is only perceivable in how close the notes are played, which you can achieve with the release knob.


This was driving me insane. I wish they add some direct way to perform just the same note with variation, and not a bow change. It feels like the player is sawing the string.


----------



## DANIELE

I used only SM strings in all my last tracks and I used it often for the ostinato (there is an OST I did only on spotify where I used them, it was the 1.1 version if I remember correctly).

The problem you are talking about is because the shorts behavior (in the ensembles) is worst in 1.2b than in 1.1. I'm actually using 1.1 for shorts and 1.2b for the rest. My previous statement is because they said many times that they worked on shorts and solved the problem in the upcoming update.

Anyway I was always able to avoid the machine gun effect with a small effort.


----------



## muziksculp

Bollen said:


> since detache is the very opposite of legato: legato = tied together, bound; whereas detache = detached, separate. In string writing a detache is _supposed_ to be a re-articulating of the note without changing bow direction


Not true. Detache also means changing bow direction on each note, but you can play them disconnected (more pressure on the bow with index finger), or more legato style, smoother style. (less pressure with index finger) for a smooth bow change legato transition.


----------



## Tralen

DANIELE said:


> I used only SM strings in all my last tracks and I used it often for the ostinato (there is an OST I did only on spotify where I used them, it was the 1.1 version if I remember correctly).
> 
> The problem you are talking about is because the shorts behavior (in the ensembles) is worst in 1.2b than in 1.1. I'm actually using 1.1 for shorts and 1.2b for the rest. My previous statement is because they said many times that they worked on shorts and solved the problem in the upcoming update.
> 
> Anyway I was always able to avoid the machine gun effect with a small effort.


I hope the update comes soon. I'm entering that frustrating period where it feels worthless to work on current projects because you will have to adjust to the update.


----------



## Bollen

muziksculp said:


> Not true. Detache also means changing bow direction on each note, but you can play them disconnected (more pressure on the bow with index finger), or more legato style, smoother style. (less pressure with index finger) for a smooth bow change legato transition.



Well this why I said "supposed to". Many techniques are taught one way and then professionals perform them in numerous different ways according to context. For example, if I _write_ legato on a passage a string player will just try to unite the notes as much as possible (like she does in the video), but if I write a slur over two or three notes they will play it on one bow i.e. slurred. All these terms are waaayyy more vague in real music than in sample libraries where they are very specific. And also, you cannot take a YouTube instrument tutorial as a point of reference, since specific instrument techniques don't always apply to orchestration or notational standards.

Anyway case in point:

Detache:
View attachment VSL.mp3


SM's detache:
View attachment SM.mp3


----------



## muziksculp

Bollen said:


> but if I write a slur over two or three notes they will play it on one bow i.e. slurred.


Yup, that's right.



Bollen said:


> And also, you cannot take a YouTube instrument tutorial as a point of reference, since specific instrument techniques don't always apply to orchestration or notational standards.


I know what I'm talking about when it comes to violin, and violin playing. I'm just referred to this YT video because it shows exactly what I have studied with regards to Violin Playing, terminology, technique, ..etc. It doesn't have to be a Julliard Professor showing these techniques to be valid.


----------



## DANIELE

Tralen said:


> I hope the update comes soon. I'm entering that frustrating period where it feels worthless to work on current projects because you will have to adjust to the update.


I have been in that period for months now. 

I literally need to write something I cannot wait anymore.


----------



## muziksculp

Let's go back to topic. SM Update 2.01 , Would love to hear the Ensembles, and how much they are improved.


----------



## Bollen

muziksculp said:


> It doesn't have to be a Julliard Professor showing these techniques to be valid


No absolutely, you are correct! I was in no way dismissing the girl in the video or her qualifications. What I was saying, and I suspect you know too since you've studied it, is that the way a composer thinks is not the same way the instrumentalist thinks. This is something even conductors get drilled in i.e. you request a certain passage sound in a certain way, leave it to the musician to find the best technique to accomplish it.

On a side note, I think these conversations are invaluable to get the best result out of libraries! Because they're about music, phrasing and the nature of performance... My 2p.


----------



## Ivan Duch

Since we're focusing on the flaws of the library (the virtues are many and I find myself using the library daily for stuff I can't do with my other libraries), *we can put together a list to help the development of future updates*:

I'll start...

1. I agree that the shorts are lacking in general, they sound repetitive and artificial for many applications (at least to my ears). I think libraries like the Infinite Series solved it quite well and it's way easier to avoid any machine-gun effect with them. But maybe it's due to the nature of strings.

2. Ostinatos, I'm always trying to make them sound musical and realistic, this was the only library I had that could get some "decent" results with them (The legato sort of ostinato). But I've been having better results with Adachi round-robin legatos lately. I think the library is missing some more controllers to handle more variation, like bow pressure.

3. I usually have problems with vibrato. Particularly on the solo strings. I've been testing with it by manually assigning one of the leap motion movements to pitch bend, I still have to practice more but it seems promising. That said, I heard more credible vibratos from SWAM or Infinite Series from just using vibrato depth and rate.

4. The tremolos sound very machine-gunny to me. I could never make them work. And maybe it's me but I can't vary the speed too much.


----------



## DANIELE

Ivan Duch said:


> 2. Ostinatos, I'm always trying to make them sound musical and realistic, this was the only library I had that could get some "decent" results with them (The legato sort of ostinato). But I've been having better results with Adachi round-robin legatos lately. I think the library is missing some more controllers to handle more variation, like bow pressure.


I remember they said that they cannot implement a bow pressure control like Audio Modeling does, maybe in the meantime the technology evolved but since SM-Strings is sample based and not a total physical modelled library a "Bow Pressure" knob is out of the question (I would like to have that control too).


Ivan Duch said:


> 4. The tremolos sound very machine-gunny to me. I could never make them work. And maybe it's me but I can't vary the speed too much.


About tremolos I remember other users said the same thing (me too). The tremolos are pretty static and I also suggested a knob control instead of a keyswitch one because with the last one I often have some problem when I'm looping a part of a track. But I think this will be addressed in future updates and not in this one. The first thing must be about the sound, then they could work on the rest. I'm happy about the special techniques improvement anyway and I hope they worked on many of them in the 2.01 already.


----------



## Ivan Duch

DANIELE said:


> The first thing must be about the sound, then they could work on the rest.


I agree, extended techniques like tremolos are definitely an afterthought for me as well. I have other libraries that can handle that.

What I don't have and haven't seen is a library that can achieve this level of musicality in a phrase. So sound is probably the biggest thing.

I personally don't dislike the timbre itself (except for the celli it's very flexible and you can change it in many ways), it's more about the *vibrato, shorts, and some legato transitions* for me.

If I had to pick one of the 3 it would definitely be the shorts and note attack variations. That's the sort of stuff that sometimes makes a particular phrase sound bad and I can't completely fix it.


----------



## Tralen

Really minor thing, but it bothers me to no end that the PDF manual title is "The Trombone Manual". I always keep hunting for it among the dozen tabs open in my browser.


----------



## Batrawi

One main reason I think why the ensembles do not yet sound so great, is that the detuning technique/spread applied amongst the solo instruments of an ensemble (which I think are all based on the same single intrument) seems like a very basic one. It still gives that "accordion effect" which results from slight detuning amongst the instruments and which doesnt really work with strings. They need to avoid this technique and find new ways of analysing and replicating the natural phenomena which cause a real ensemble to sound thick & diverse which I'm pretty sure is not simply a result of simple detunes amongst the instruments in the real world. now I understand they also randomise things like vibrato & instruments tone etc... but my point is that the detuning applied at the core of all this is what ruins it all (to my ears)


----------



## Bollen

Batrawi said:


> One main reason I think why the ensembles do not yet sound so great, is that the detuning technique/spread applied amongst the solo instruments of an ensemble (which I think are all based on the same single intrument) seems like a very basic one. It still gives that "accordion effect" which results from slight detuning amongst the instruments and which doesnt really work with strings. They need to avoid this technique and find new ways of analysing and replicating the natural phenomena which cause a real ensemble to sound thick & diverse which I'm pretty sure is not simply a result of simple detunes amongst the instruments in the real world. now I understand they also randomise things like vibrato & instruments tone etc... but my point is that the detuning applied at the core of all this is what ruins it all (to my ears)


True, they could just grab VSL's dimension string and notice how out of tune they are, some of them are about 6 cents!


----------



## Ivan Duch

In general, do you feel the ensembles sound worse than the solo strings? I personally enjoy the ensemble's sound and how expressive they are, except for the stuff I mentioned before.


----------



## Batrawi

Ivan Duch said:


> In general, do you feel the ensembles sound worse than the solo strings?


Personally I believe in a general rule in modeled/semi-modeled instruments and SMS is no exception. You can start with a decent sound from a single instrument, but the more you multiply/try to go bigger the further you're departing from reality.


----------



## muziksculp

But we haven't yet heard the ver. 2.01 Ensembles, they might have gotten some nice improvements. 

waiting to hear a demo of the new Ens. Strings. ver 2.01


----------



## Pier-V

Batrawi said:


> One main reason I think why the ensembles do not yet sound so great, is that the detuning technique/spread applied amongst the solo instruments of an ensemble (which I think are all based on the same single intrument) seems like a very basic one. It still gives that "accordion effect" which results from slight detuning amongst the instruments and which doesnt really work with strings. They need to avoid this technique and find new ways of analysing and replicating the natural phenomena which cause a real ensemble to sound thick & diverse which I'm pretty sure is not simply a result of simple detunes amongst the instruments in the real world. now I understand they also randomise things like vibrato & instruments tone etc... but my point is that the detuning applied at the core of all this is what ruins it all (to my ears)


+1 You may be onto something here. I'm just making a wild guess and I apologize in advance for the slightly technical talking, but maybe the tuning musicians use when playing in unison has to do with differential equations, or at least in part. I'll try to explain what I mean as simply as possible:

1) The ensemble hits the same note at the same time, but there are slight imperfections in pitch at the start;
2) Every musician hear and evaluates these differencies, and as a result they try to reach what they estimate as an "average ensemble pitch" (AEP) - this process is higly individual, again every single performer does this slightly differently;
3) The performers reach the AEP as close as they can, but because of both inertia in their physical movement and differences in AEP estimation they go _slightly beyond that value;_
4) After realizing what happened during (3), they all start from (1) again. All of this is done instinctively in a very brief temporal span - the more professional the performers are, the more interesting is the ensemble behaviour.

This is just an idea, but maybe it could be the start of an interesting discussion even if it turns out as a wrong analysis?



Spoiler: Differential equations explained with the least amount of theory possible, for those interested


----------



## Batrawi

Pier-V said:


> +1 You may be onto something here. I'm just making a wild guess and I apologize in advance for the slightly technical talking, but maybe the tuning musicians use when playing in unison has to do with differential equations, or at least in part. I'll try to explain what I mean as simply as possible:
> 
> 1) The ensemble hits the same note at the same time, but there are slight imperfections in pitch at the start;
> 2) Every musician hear and evaluates these differencies, and as a result they try to reach what they estimate as an "average ensemble pitch" (AEP) - this process is higly individual, again every single performer does this slightly differently;
> 3) The performers reach the AEP as close as they can, but because of both inertia in their physical movement and differences in AEP estimation they go _slightly beyond that value;_
> 4) After realizing what happened during (3), they all start from (1) again. All of this is done instinctively in a very brief temporal span - the more professional the performers are, the more interesting is the ensemble behaviour.
> 
> This is just an idea, but maybe it could be the start of an interesting discussion even if it turns out as a wrong analysis?
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Differential equations explained with the least amount of theory possible, for those interested



makes perfect sense to me, and thx for sharing the video! I find it always interesting to explore such theories even though I don't understand half of what they're saying😁.


----------



## Ivan M.

Maybe that could be improved (and real player behaviour mimicked) by modulating the vibrato depth and frequency, simply not have them static. This means the vib. speed speeds up, and then slows down, resulting in one instrument catching up, and drifting away from the rest in cycles.

But is that really how real players play? They probably have their vibrato in muscle memory, and maybe it doesn't adjust, even subconsciously? Obviously, we can only speculate, until someone actually measures this.

Btw, I use the current SM Strings and didn't hear any accordion effect, but that's just me.


----------



## Batrawi

Ivan M. said:


> Btw, I use the current SM Strings and didn't hear any accordion effect, but that's just me.


It's very subtle but once your ear catches it, there is no going back
I think it's obvious here when he starts playing @6:55. Some call it "fluty effect" or maybe "harmonica" depending on each one's perception and audio-vocabulary, but in all cases it referes to "something wrong"


----------



## DANIELE

31/12/2021 is slowly approaching.


----------



## Ivan M.

Batrawi said:


> It's very subtle but once your ear catches it, there is no going back
> I think it's obvious here when he starts playing @6:55. Some call it "fluty effect" or maybe "harmonica" depending on each one's perception and audio-vocabulary, but in all cases it referes to "something wrong"



Oooh, yes, I know what you mean, and I'm aware of it, but never considered it bad. I personally hate a piercing strings sound (low vibrato). I enjoy a good detune. This is completely fine for me, I like it. And it even works very well in (my) orchestrations, where I might even push that detune further than natural, because it sounds better in the mix. Realism or not, I don't care, it sounds better. It's fine.


----------



## Tralen

DANIELE said:


> 31/12/2021 is slowly approaching.


Is that an official release date, Daniele? I'm poorly informed.


----------



## DANIELE

Tralen said:


> Is that an official release date, Daniele? I'm poorly informed.


No no, a long long time ago (in a galaxy far far away) Giorgio said "before then that".


----------



## I like music

If you use the smallest ensemble possible, I feel you get the best sound. The bigger you make it the more those four units are being pseudo-replicated I feel.


----------



## Ivan Duch

Batrawi said:


> It's very subtle but once your ear catches it, there is no going back
> I think it's obvious here when he starts playing @6:55. Some call it "fluty effect" or maybe "harmonica" depending on each one's perception and audio-vocabulary, but in all cases it referes to "something wrong"



Yes, I hear that too. And I actually don't like it either. To me, it's more apparent on note changes and that's what I meant when I said I don't like some legato transitions that much.

I get a similar thing with the solo instruments, though, I'm not sure it's an ensemble issue. Actually, I get similar legato issues with the infinite woodwinds. I have to be very careful with the mod wheel and velocity to avoid that sort of weird transition between notes. 

That said, I also don't like how most sample libraries sound completely disconnected when trying to put together musical phrases. So I still enjoy this sort of library for lots of applications.


----------



## Tralen

I like music said:


> If you use the smallest ensemble possible, I feel you get the best sound. The bigger you make it the more those four units are being pseudo-replicated I feel.


Yes, I find it is more convincing to pick a medium/small ensemble and layer with some solo players.


----------



## philippe goi

It seems to me that the update will offer new small ensembles (chamber strings), these superpositions will be able to offer the composer an interesting work for the divisions, and to create small section overlays with different first-thought algorithms. An idea for future updating would be the automatic divisi as did formerly Synful orchestra .


----------



## muziksculp

philippe goi said:


> It seems to me that the update will offer new small ensembles (chamber strings), these superpositions will be able to offer the composer an interesting work for the divisions, and to create small section overlays with different first-thought algorithms. An idea for future updating would be the automatic divisi as did formerly Synful orchestra .


I keep forgetting that the 2.01 will add Chamber Strings to the ensembles. 

I would love to hear how they sound in a demo. Also the full ensembles in ver 2.01 

Cheers,
Muziksculp


----------



## Katznegold

DANIELE said:


> 31/12/2021 is slowly approaching.


I'd personally rather wait for a solid update in 2022 than a rushed one in 2021... although I'm extremely anxious to get it


----------



## muziksculp

Katznegold said:


> I'd personally rather wait for a solid update in 2022 than a rushed one in 2021... although I'm extremely anxious to get it


I don't think they are rushing it, they don't need to.

They are very professional, and serious about their libraries, and know when to release them. If they release it this year, and that's what Giorgio hinted at, is because it will be ready this year, not because they are rushing to meet a deadline.


----------



## DANIELE

Katznegold said:


> I'd personally rather wait for a solid update in 2022 than a rushed one in 2021... although I'm extremely anxious to get it


The last update dropped more than a year ago (26/10/2020), I don't think they are rushing and I never asked to do so, they posted some news a while ago telling us that the update is almost done, this is why we are waiting for it to came out. I also want to have a polished experience but I'm confident that the upcoming update will not be the last one and that there is a lot of improvements for us to play with.

AV did the same, every update was a solid one and every time he improved or added something, this is fine for us I think. Worth every euro.

Plus: my post was about a joke we did some page ago with Giorgio, this is why I posted this, no rush on Giorgio and Peter.


----------



## Phillip Dixon

Interested in these, can someone tell me the download size, can't seem to find it anywhere 
Want to know if I need yet another SSD


----------



## Trevor Meier

A mere 5.5GB!


----------



## Phillip Dixon

Cheers


----------



## Phillip Dixon

On SM site
It says.. "New" v 1 2.B.
Is this the update you're all talking about


----------



## Tralen

Phillip Dixon said:


> On SM site
> It says.. "New" v 1 2.B.
> Is this the update you're all talking about


No, that update was from last October. We are expecting the 2.0 update.


----------



## Phillip Dixon

OK. It's an old new😊


----------



## DANIELE

Phillip Dixon said:


> On SM site
> It says.. "New" v 1 2.B.
> Is this the update you're all talking about


You should look at the date too.


----------



## I like music

2.0 is due shortly! We were told 2021 very recently. 

That said, developing a product like this is surely replete roadblocks and bumps. 

So even though they sounded confident, there's a chance it becomes a 2022 thing!


----------



## muziksculp

For ver 2 Update


----------



## Tralen

I like music said:


> 2.0 is due shortly! We were told 2021 very recently.
> 
> That said, developing a product like this is surely replete roadblocks and bumps.
> 
> So even though they sounded confident, there's a chance it becomes a 2022 thing!


----------



## I like music

muziksculp said:


> For ver 2 Update


I'm sure you're in two places at once. 

Lying in wait. Poor Jasper and Giorgio...


----------



## I like music

Tralen said:


>


Start next year with a bang, no? Haha


----------



## DANIELE

I like music said:


> I'm sure you're in two places at once.
> 
> Lying in wait. Poor Jasper and Giorgio...


Who is Jasper?


----------



## I like music

DANIELE said:


> Who is Jasper?


Jasper Blunk of Performance Samples. Muziksculp is eagerly awaiting that release too! As are many (there's a huge thread, library sounds good pre-release)


----------



## DANIELE

I like music said:


> Jasper Blunk of Performance Samples. Muziksculp is eagerly awaiting that release too! As are many (there's a huge thread, library sounds good pre-release)


Ah ok sorry, I was thinking you changed name to Peter.


----------



## I like music

I'd love to hear a demo or two to get me through the next couple of weeks!


----------



## Ivan Duch

Has anyone explored recording several instances of the small ensemble configuration + solo to get a more realistic sounding ensemble?

I'm liking the results. The lazy version is copy pasting and humanizing the initial performance. I have some reaper scripts that can humanize all the selected CCs.


----------



## Tralen

Ivan Duch said:


> Has anyone explored recording several instances of the small ensemble configuration + solo to get a more realistic sounding ensemble?
> 
> I'm liking the results. The lazy version is copy pasting and humanizing the initial performance. I have some reaper scripts that can humanize all the selected CCs.


I'm doing something very similar. I prefer that sound to the sound of the larger ensembles.


----------



## lychee

It seems that in the end V2 will be released on December 31st, maybe even on December 45th as we still don't have any news on this subject.


----------



## I like music

Ivan Duch said:


> Has anyone explored recording several instances of the small ensemble configuration + solo to get a more realistic sounding ensemble?
> 
> I'm liking the results. The lazy version is copy pasting and humanizing the initial performance. I have some reaper scripts that can humanize all the selected CCs.


Did this exact thing a few months ago, and it sounds _much_ better!


----------



## Ivan Duch

Good to know. I think it improves the sound of the ensemble as well.

What I've been doing is having several instances of the small ensemble (work like divisi) and assign them different instrument IRs, attack detuning, and spacialization from within Kontakt.


----------



## Ivan Duch

The other day I was researching Embertone Friedlander Violin and that whole series and noticed they have round robins and also Sul Ponticello and Tasto. All of which seems to be modeled? Not sure but I think I read that somewhere in the forum.

I'm wondering if something like that could be implemented into these strings in the future.


----------



## muziksculp

Ivan Duch said:


> The other day I was researching Embertone Friedlander Violin and that whole series and noticed they have round robins and also Sul Ponticello and Tasto. All of which seems to be modeled? Not sure but I think I read that somewhere in the forum.


That's new to me. Modelled ? I would be surprised it they really are modelled. Can anyone confirm this ?


----------



## Nando Florestan

muziksculp said:


> That's new to me. Modelled ? I would be surprised it they really are modelled. Can anyone confirm this ?


Not modelled, just faked in Kontakt effects. The features are good but the sound of that violin is difficult. I never use it and wish I could sell it.


----------



## muziksculp

Nando Florestan said:


> Not modelled, just faked in Kontakt effects. The features are good but the sound of that violin is difficult. I never use it and wish I could sell it.


Not a fan of the sound of the violin either.


----------



## Ivan Duch

Still, if there are ways to fake sul ponticello, tasto, and round robins with the current set of samples in Samplemodeling, it might be worth it. I think they're reworking the shorts for this update, though.


----------



## Tralen

For Reaper users, here are the Note/CC names for Samplemodeling Strings (as defined in the manual).

To load them, in your MIDI Editor, go to:
File > Note/CC Names > Load Note/CC Names from file 

The Keyswitches are different between Violin/Viola vs. Cello/Bass (High vs. Low strings) and there are minor differences to the CCs between Solo vs. Ensemble, so the files are split.

Let me know if there is any problem.


----------



## Nando Florestan

About a year ago I exchanged a couple emails with Peter Siedlaczek. I asked him if sul tasto and sul ponticello could be faked with the Timbral Shaping feature. He answered they would have to research sul tasto and sul ponticello before including these in the library.

I tried it anyway and didn't get very far, especially with sul ponticello which is harder to fake using existing samples.


----------



## shawnsingh

Nando Florestan said:


> About a year ago I exchanged a couple emails with Peter Siedlaczek. I asked him if sul tasto and sul ponticello could be faked with the Timbral Shaping feature. He answered they would have to research sul tasto and sul ponticello before including these in the library.
> 
> I tried it anyway and didn't get very far, especially with sul ponticello which is harder to fake using existing samples.


My guess, I don't think timbral shaping is enough here. If I understand correctly, timbral shaping feature is mostly about changing the relative strength of harmonics. But for sul pont, I think there would be many more added time varying scratchy harmonics that get added to the sound. 
For pure sul tasto, maybe it could be approximated with filtering, and maybe timbral shaping would work for that aspect, but for flautando, there's some kind of airy wispy quality that gets added because of the light bow pressure. Maybe it has to do with the natural unsteadiness of even a professional player at the extreme light bow pressure, seems like harmonics are not enough to model that.


----------



## Bollen

Nando Florestan said:


> About a year ago I exchanged a couple emails with Peter Siedlaczek. I asked him if sul tasto and sul ponticello could be faked with the Timbral Shaping feature. He answered they would have to research sul tasto and sul ponticello before including these in the library.
> 
> I tried it anyway and didn't get very far, especially with sul ponticello which is harder to fake using existing samples.


No you can't really. I was involved in an experiment with SM and couldn't get anywhere close. Then I tuned to the magician I'm developing a library with, he analysed it to hell and then applied his magic to completely mimic the sonic spectrum of sul pont with the SM sound. Still didn't sound right! Like @shawnsingh says, there's more to it, erratic variations, scratch noises, random harmonics, etc.


----------



## Vardaro

Is there a way of randomising the timbral shaping? E.g. in Kontakt?


----------



## Nando Florestan

It's not a synth, what do you think randomizing would accomplish?


----------



## I like music

Giorgio confirmed on this thread that it isn't possible to do (I believe)


----------



## Vardaro

Nando Florestan said:


> It's not a synth, what do you think randomizing would accomplish?


To create the unsteadyness in the harmonics we find in sul ponticello or flautando.

Sul tasto, on the other hand, is a steadier sound.


----------



## muziksculp

But Audio Modeling solo strings can do Sul Tasto, and Sul Ponticello bowing, since you have control over bow's distance from the bridge, and pressure being applied to the bow. I'm not sure it can do Flautando in a convincing manner.


----------



## Vardaro

muziksculp said:


> But Audio Modeling solo strings can do Sul Tasto, and Sul Ponticello bowing


Damn!


----------



## lychee

I was hoping for a lot of SM S&ES, and I realize that the SWAM strings offer more in certain areas like the management of the pressure on the strings and the position of the bow in real time, which allows a lot more expressiveness.
S&ES has the advantage of being a complete package of solo instruments and ensembles, which made me prefer the Sample Modeling solution.
I would love, in this V2 or later, to have these same sound transformation possibilities as with the SWAM engine.


----------



## Leandro Gardini

I am testing SM Strings 2.0, and I can assure the improvement, especially on the spicc and marc, is substantial.
However, sul pont and flautando are not addressed on this update as far as I know.


----------



## muziksculp

Leandro Gardini said:


> I am testing SM Strings 2.0, and I can assure the improvement, especially on the spicc and marc, is substantial.
> However, sul pont and flautando are not addressed on this update as far as I know.


Thanks, Awesome !

So... Can you tell us more about SM Solo & Ens. Strings. 2.0

Any major improvements to the Ensembles, besides the availability of a new Chamber Size Strings sections ? What else are the new, and exciting improvements compared to version 1 ?

Is the GUI of ver. 2 the same, or has there been any changes ?


----------



## Bollen

muziksculp said:


> But Audio Modeling solo strings can do Sul Tasto, and Sul Ponticello bowing, since you have control over bow's distance from the bridge, and pressure being applied to the bow


I have heard this multiple times and I have also requested people to show us this in an example... To this day no show! I'm starting to think it's a gimmick or a vague approximation.


----------



## DANIELE

Leandro Gardini said:


> I am testing SM Strings 2.0, and I can assure the improvement, especially on the spicc and marc, is substantial.
> However, sul pont and flautando are not addressed on this update as far as I know.


You have a flautando (sort of) at very low dynamics.



muziksculp said:


> Thanks, Awesome !
> 
> So... Can you tell us more about SM Solo & Ens. Strings. 2.0
> 
> Any major improvements to the Ensembles, besides the availability of a new Chamber Size Strings sections ? What else are the new, and exciting improvements compared to version 1 ?
> 
> Is the GUI of ver. 2 the same, or has there been any changes ?


AFAIK the improvements are mostly about a new body IR technique applied to the instruments (it changes the sound a lot) and about improvements on the staccato/marcato side. Plus the chamber strings. It is a very good update. Just the things I mentioned required a lot of study and research.

They are working very hard on the library. There should be more developers like them.


----------



## lychee

Bollen said:


> I have heard this multiple times and I have also requested people to show us this in an example... To this day no show! I'm starting to think it's a gimmick or a vague approximation.


I don't have the SWAM strings, but I have Friktion, and knowing that the latter has the same possibilities of control over the pressure and the position of the bow, I suppose that SWAM is capable of all the articulations relating to these manipulations.

Here is an old test that I had done with Friktion:



https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/friktion-torture-mp3.36914/


----------



## Ivan Duch

DANIELE said:


> You have a flautando (sort of) at very low dynamics.
> 
> 
> AFAIK the improvements are mostly about a new body IR technique applied to the instruments (it changes the sound a lot) and about improvements on the staccato/marcato side. Plus the chamber strings. It is a very good update. Just the things I mentioned required a lot of study and research.
> 
> They are working very hard on the library. There should be more developers like them.


Agreed. And I think developers like Samplemodeling and Aaron Venture deserve high praise, they went a different route and I feel like they're shaping the future of VIs.

They're making a workflow where AI just plays notation using hybrid or modeled instruments like these possible. Something like Noteperformer but with a sound that can be used in final productions with some external mixing and mastering and unlimited expression nuance.

I wonder if we'll see something like that happen in the next 5 years.


----------



## DANIELE

Ivan Duch said:


> Agreed. And I think developers like Samplemodeling and Aaron Venture deserve high praise, they went a different route and I feel like they're shaping the future of VIs.
> 
> They're making a workflow where AI just plays notation using hybrid or modeled instruments like these possible. Something like Noteperformer but with a sound that can be used in final productions with some external mixing and mastering and unlimited expression nuance.
> 
> I wonder if we'll see something like that happen in the next 5 years.


Exactly, they need time to research the math they need for their purposes, they need to sample the instruments, they need to study about the spectrum of the instruments, the body etc...they need to implement all this without choking the cpu and the resources in general. They need to face Kontakt limits and bugs etc...

It is a world I found myself loving a lot, but it requires a lot of time. I'm confident they'll keep working hard on it to fill the gap the library still have (some special techniques, articulations etc...).

But you have to think that it is already pretty solid and useful in most contexts.


----------



## Ivan Duch

DANIELE said:


> Exactly, they need time to research the math they need for their purposes, they need to sample the instruments, they need to study about the spectrum of the instruments, the body etc...they need to implement all this without choking the cpu and the resources in general. They need to face Kontakt limits and bugs etc...
> 
> It is a world I found myself loving a lot, but it requires a lot of time. I'm confident they'll keep working hard on it to fill the gap the library still have (some special techniques, articulations etc...).
> 
> But you have to think that it is already pretty solid and useful in most contexts.


Exactly!

And, yes, it's definitely useful. I've been using Samplemodeling Strings pretty much every day since I purchased it. I don't use it for everything because sometimes I want other sound for the strings or I need something specific it can't do. But in its current form, it definitely has its place in my template and I use it for all the stuff normal libraries can't do.

I have high hopes for the upcoming update and the future of this technology.


----------



## muziksculp

DANIELE said:


> You have a flautando (sort of) at very low dynamics.
> 
> 
> AFAIK the improvements are mostly about a new body IR technique applied to the instruments (it changes the sound a lot) and about improvements on the staccato/marcato side. Plus the chamber strings. It is a very good update. Just the things I mentioned required a lot of study and research.
> 
> They are working very hard on the library. There should be more developers like them.


Thanks. 

These are very important improvements, and will surely make a big positive impact on this library. I'm very excited to see the update released soon.


----------



## muziksculp

Ivan Duch said:


> I wonder if we'll see something like that happen in the next 5 years.


Yes. I really think this is going to happen. It's just a matter of time. There are more developers showing up that are using innovative technologies, especially Hybrid (Sampling + Modeling), which I feel makes a lot of sense. i.e. Check out the V-Horns by Acoustic Samples, they will be developing additional brass, plus woodwinds, strings, ..etc. in the future. 

https://www.acousticsamples.net/vhorns


----------



## I like music

Hold the line, chaps. Don't be distracted away from the *release date *hunt!!!


----------



## Ivan Duch

muziksculp said:


> Yes. I really think this is going to happen. It's just a matter of time. There are more developers showing up that are using innovative technologies, especially Hybrid (Sampling + Modeling), which I feel makes a lot of sense. i.e. Check out the V-Horns by Acoustic Samples, they will be developing additional brass, plus woodwinds, strings, ..etc. in the future.
> 
> https://www.acousticsamples.net/vhorns


Yes, those v-horns sound awesome. I think the main stuff that needs to get improved in the hybrid approach is legatos and tone. And that developer seems to be going in the right direction.


----------



## Tralen

DANIELE said:


> You have a flautando (sort of) at very low dynamics.
> 
> 
> AFAIK the improvements are mostly about a new body IR technique applied to the instruments (it changes the sound a lot) and about improvements on the staccato/marcato side. Plus the chamber strings. It is a very good update. Just the things I mentioned required a lot of study and research.
> 
> They are working very hard on the library. There should be more developers like them.


Daniele, what should we expect from the chamber strings? Are they just a different ensemble size?


----------



## timbit2006

muziksculp said:


> Yes. I really think this is going to happen. It's just a matter of time. There are more developers showing up that are using innovative technologies, especially Hybrid (Sampling + Modeling), which I feel makes a lot of sense. i.e. Check out the V-Horns by Acoustic Samples, they will be developing additional brass, plus woodwinds, strings, ..etc. in the future.
> 
> https://www.acousticsamples.net/vhorns


Apparently Samplemodeling holds the patent to the phase alignment technology in instruments. I wonder if this will ever be an issue for other library developers trying to develop in this field.


----------



## Tralen

timbit2006 said:


> Apparently Samplemodeling holds the patent to the phase alignment technology in instruments. I wonder if this will ever be an issue for other library developers trying to develop in this field.


Well, we already have Aaron Venture and Chris Hein doing this (that I recall), so they are at least not enforcing it.


----------



## Nando Florestan

OK so that patent expires in September 2024.


----------



## DANIELE

Tralen said:


> Daniele, what should we expect from the chamber strings? Are they just a different ensemble size?


No it is not the same thing, for example the vibrato is more audible and more present than in the ensemble. They are thinked for a more intimate sound and very useful for sharper passages too.


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

Nando Florestan said:


> OK so that patent expires in September 2024.


You know that patents do not reallly protect the invention, unless they are "properly" written  Some claim to have developed their own "proprietary" harmonic alignment technology. I bet nobody will be able to do it. It's "properly" written".


----------



## I like music

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> You know that patents do not reallly protect the invention, unless they are "properly" written  Some claim to have developed their own "proprietary" harmonic alignment technology. I bet nobody will be able to do it. It's "properly" written".


When can we get our hands on the next properly phase-aligned strings version? Still 2021?😁


----------



## timbit2006

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> You know that patents do not reallly protect the invention, unless they are "properly" written  Some claim to have developed their own "proprietary" harmonic alignment technology. I bet nobody will be able to do it. It's "properly" written".


You're also the only one smart enough to realize the importance of an anechoic chamber in the creation of phase aligned samples.


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

I like music said:


> When can we get our hands on the next properly phase-aligned strings version? Still 2021?😁


yes


----------



## Trevor Meier

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> yes


Wooo! I am hotly anticipating this release. It's definitely helping me avoid looking at Abbey Road Two...


----------



## I like music

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> yes


That makes you Santa Claus, you know!


----------



## Fa

The team was working quite hard the last 2 weeks, (almost day and night...) to secure an "as-reliable-and-error-free-as-possible" master. Happy to disclose that tonight we closed a candidate that is now under final review to be released in the next coming days: that gives us a strong feeling that the deadline of "before Christmas" can be matched! 

In the new release there is something familiar, but something quite new as well, and to experiment a bit with the large set of options enabled by the 2.01 update will keep our fellow users and mates busy (and hopefully happy to discover all the new possibilities), so no better time than holidays... 

Now that a bit of technical work is over, it's time for music! Let's finally write and arrange...


----------



## chapbot

Fa said:


> The team was working quite hard the last 2 weeks, (almost day and night...) to secure an "as-reliable-and-error-free-as-possible" master. Happy to disclose that tonight we closed a candidate that is now under final review to be released in the next coming days: that gives us a strong feeling that the deadline of "before Christmas" can be matched!
> 
> In the new release there is something familiar, but something quite new as well, and to experiment a bit with the large set of options enabled by the 2.01 update will keep our fellow users and mates busy (and hopefully happy to discover all the new possibilities), so no better time than holidays...
> 
> Now that a bit of technical work is over, it's time for music! Let's finally write and arrange...


Perhaps Santa could instruct one of his elves to create a short sound clip for his faithful on this forum.


----------



## Trevor Meier

Fa said:


> The team was working quite hard the last 2 weeks, (almost day and night...) to secure an "as-reliable-and-error-free-as-possible" master. Happy to disclose that tonight we closed a candidate that is now under final review to be released in the next coming days: that gives us a strong feeling that the deadline of "before Christmas" can be matched!
> 
> In the new release there is something familiar, but something quite new as well, and to experiment a bit with the large set of options enabled by the 2.01 update will keep our fellow users and mates busy (and hopefully happy to discover all the new possibilities), so no better time than holidays...
> 
> Now that a bit of technical work is over, it's time for music! Let's finally write and arrange...


I’m thrilled!! I can’t wait to get my hands on it and make some music!


----------



## zigzag

One thing that would be really helpful, since modeled instruments are so different from traditionally sampled instruments, is a series of ultra short videos where each video shows how to recreate a single articulation with SM Strings. 

Videos would show what parameters needs to be adjusted (eg. CC, high/low attack, connected/overlapping/with a gap MIDI notes etc.) to achieve a specific articulation. At the end of the video a short example would demonstrate what kind of sound we can expect with properly adjusted parameters. 

This would IMO really lower the learning curve. For any common articulation a user could look up a short video that would show a good starting point. These videos would be different from a tutorial that you watch from start to end. They would serve more as articulations reference manual, where you can quickly look up only the thing you need.


----------



## muziksculp




----------



## I like music

muziksculp said:


>


You realise that they'll expect us to produce some music with these strings, and post it on this thread, right? I feel like we've painted a target on our own backs.

You especially :D


----------



## Eptesicus

Sorry to have missed this, but what are the big updates coming to this?


----------



## Thorgod10

Eptesicus said:


> Sorry to have missed this, but what are the big updates coming to this?


To be simple:
-Much better shorts, so you aren't stylistically stuck.
-Vastly improved sound.


----------



## Tralen

Thorgod10 said:


> To be simple:
> -Much better shorts, so you aren't stylistically stuck.
> -Vastly improved sound.


Chamber strings!


----------



## Thorgod10

THAT TOO, YES
Which with the improved shorts, will blast this library into orbit as being a must own


----------



## Ziffles

Thorgod10 said:


> THAT TOO, YES
> Which with the improved shorts, will blast this library into orbit as being a must own


You do realize you're putting my expectations through the roof with this statement


----------



## muziksculp

Will 2.01 offer any Legato Improvements ?


----------



## Eptesicus

Thorgod10 said:


> To be simple:
> -Much better shorts, so you aren't stylistically stuck.
> -Vastly improved sound.



Ah OK cool. Looking forward to trying it out.


----------



## Leandro Gardini

muziksculp said:


> Will 2.01 offer any Legato Improvements ?


There are more ways to program your legato. Now it's even possible to fake custom glissandos.


----------



## Ivan Duch

Wasn't glissando possible by increasing the attack time cc? Or this is a new thing? 

Speaking of which, any trick for creating those tremolo + glissando like John Williams sometimes uses? I've been able to fake it a bit by using the glissando on one divisi and a tremolo fading in and out on another divisi. Since the tremolo itself doesn't seem to have a legato transition. 

I have yet to try using pitch bend on a tremolo, though...


----------



## Bollen

Ivan Duch said:


> Wasn't glissando possible by increasing the attack time cc? Or this is a new thing?
> 
> Speaking of which, any trick for creating those tremolo + glissando like John Williams sometimes uses? I've been able to fake it a bit by using the glissando on one divisi and a tremolo fading in and out on another divisi. Since the tremolo itself doesn't seem to have a legato transition.
> 
> I have yet to try using pitch bend on a tremolo, though...


I have, but it only works up to a tone or something. That's why inevitably you need to have a dedicated FX library.


----------



## Ivan Duch

You can edit the pitch bend behavior to extend up to a bit over a minor third (300 cents). I've done it in the past with the library for some other uses.

I just tested it with tremolos, I like the layering of legato/glissando + trem a bit more, though.


----------



## muziksculp

Leandro Gardini said:


> There are more ways to program your legato. Now it's even possible to fake custom glissandos.


You mean it's possible to fake custom glissandos in the new version 2.01 ? or are you referring to the current version ? 

Also more ways to program the legato, I would like to watch a video tutorial that explains these topics in detail. I don't know if Sample Modeling will be posting a video showing all the new features of the upcoming version 2.01 update, but that would surely be helpful. 

Looking forward to ver 2.01 release.


----------



## Bollen

Ivan Duch said:


> You can edit the pitch bend behavior to extend up to a bit over a minor third (300 cents). I've done it in the past with the library for some other uses.
> 
> I just tested it with tremolos, I like the layering of legato/glissando + trem a bit more, though.


Good to know! Though I've been using this library: https://shop.karoryfer.com/products/vengeful-strings-bundle and/or CH which are very compatible for extended techniques and other FX.


----------



## Leandro Gardini

muziksculp said:


> You mean it's possible to fake custom glissandos in the new version 2.01 ? or are you referring to the current version ?
> 
> Also more ways to program the legato, I would like to watch a video tutorial that explains these topics in detail. I don't know if Sample Modeling will be posting a video showing all the new features of the upcoming version 2.01 update, but that would surely be helpful.
> 
> Looking forward to ver 2.01 release.


The update is mostly concentrated on the improvement of the body impulse responses and short notes. However, I feel it's easier to program glissandos now.


----------



## Ivan Duch

Leandro Gardini said:


> The update is mostly concentrated on the improvement of the body impulse responses and short notes. However, I feel it's easier to program glissandos now.


That's great to hear. I already liked what you could do with glissandi in this library. They're very flexible and I like the sound of them.


----------



## muziksculp

Leandro Gardini said:


> I feel it's easier to program glissandos now.


Sorry, but I'm still not quite sure if you mean now in version 2.01, or the current version ?


----------



## Nando Florestan

He is a beta tester of the Sample Modeling strings. His now is our future.


----------



## muziksculp

Nando Florestan said:


> He is a beta tester of the Sample Modeling strings. His now is our future.


OK, now that makes 'now' much clearer. Thanks  

Actually, I was suspecting that, but wasn't sure, so had to double check.


----------



## lychee

I do not know if that is the case in this new version, but I would have liked the management of the polyphonic legato on the strings ensemble (and solo too).


----------



## Fa

muziksculp said:


> Will 2.01 offer any Legato Improvements ?


Not dramatic (was already at least good in my opinion...) but some improvement yes (improved connections for smoother sound still controlled by velocity).


----------



## Fa

lychee said:


> I do not know if that is the case in this new version, but I would have liked the management of the polyphonic legato on the strings ensemble (and solo too).


Not sure what you are referring to: polyphonic legato is already in place with both the C (standard) and C# (full poly) KS. With standard you may simulate bichords, and with full poly you may play more voices and still get legato connections: just have to take into account that amount of notes overlapping is critical (if it's too long, standard C KS will play mono, and poly KS C# will play "chords") but with a bit of adjustment you get it the way you want. 
Still the best in my opinion is to write independent lines by the way, that gives you the maximum realism and expression.


----------



## muziksculp

Fa said:


> Not dramatic (was already at least good in my opinion...) but some improvement yes (improved connections for smoother sound still controlled by velocity).


Thanks @Fa ,

Actually, I was just teasing about the 'Legato' , since it is a popular topic on this forum.  

I think the legato is fine as is, but it's great to know that the new 2.01 version will further improve the connectivity of the legatos controlled by velocity.


----------



## Piotrek K.

I am long time lurker here and I do not own this library, but I just want to say that it seems update is here...

There is also chamber strings demo and this is a thing that is most inteeresting to me...









Solo, Chamber & Ensemble Strings v2 - Audio demos


Audio demos for Solo, Chamber & Ensemble Strings v2 by Samplemodeling




www.samplemodeling.com





is this time to buy?


----------



## muziksculp

Another super exciting day this week !


----------



## muziksculp

What's new in Samplemodeling Solo, Chamber & Ensemble Strings v. 2.0.1?​
This version employs a different approach to the instrument body impulse response, more adherent to the acoustics of real instruments. The result is a much more defined sound, with sharper attacks and transients.

The effect of note-on velocity is manifold. Generally speaking, it controls the intensity and the steepness of attacks. On overlapped notes, it controls the speed of legato/portamento.

In the range 1 -> 100, velocity mimics the acceleration of the bow, creating a kind of crescendo pattern, starting from a lower initial dynamics and progressively rising to the target dynamics dictated by CC11. The steepness and extent of this crescendo are linked to the velocity. As far as velocity approaches 100, the original attacks will be played.

If above 100, note-on velocity activates an additional attack, whose type and intensity depend on the settings of CC38. (See below).

Spiccato (off-the-string) and marcato (on-the-string) attacks can be added, and are under player’s control. For this purpose, the function of CC38 has been revised. If CC38 is around 64, the original sustain samples are played. For velocities above 100 either Spiccato or Marcato are added, depending on CC38 settings. Higher CC38 values (>64) introduce progressively more intense Spiccato, while lower values (<64) introduce more intense Marcato attacks. The length of the spiccato release can be controlled by CC27, the duration of the marcato attack - by CC26.

Legato/portamento/detaché and bow changes have been optimized. Portamento is now more easily engaged at velocities around 30 instead of 12, difficult to play on some keyboards.

Chamber Ensembles have been added. They simulate a small group of players starting from four solo instruments up to small sections. Chamber Ensembles differ from large Ensembles in many respects, the most important being the ability to play a very expressive, nearly synchronous vibrato. In our large Ensembles instead, expressive vibrato is both under control of CC1 and CC99, which act to recreate the richer sound of asynchronous vibrato. They can be used as a standalone multi (for chamber music) or in combination with the corresponding large Ensemble (for symphonic music): this combination has a richer sound, and adding the more soloistic vibrato of the Chambers to the Ensembles yields a much greater expressiveness.
Further smaller optimizations and bug fixes.


----------



## Tralen

Hmm...

I was about to update but I'm in doubt about the Extended Download purchase (it was added to my cart). Do I need to buy this again? I got it just a couple of months ago.


----------



## Markrs

This is an interesting release, as I was thinking about getting Sonokinetic Strings and now this is released. Whilst this is more money, I would really like something a bit more modelled and flexible and this would fit the bill. Or I could wait for Infinite Strings?


----------



## Fa

Markrs said:


> This is an interesting release, as I was thinking about getting Sonokinetic Strings and now this is released. Whilst this is more money, I would really like something a bit more modelled and flexible and this would fit the bill. Or I could wait for Infinite Strings?


In my opinion you won't be disappointed (but I'm not neutral on it so it's very personal opinion). What I underline is that in my opinion solos and chamber are worth the price alone, and one can consider the ensembles as a bonus...


----------



## Fa

Tralen said:


> Hmm...
> 
> I was about to update but I'm in doubt about the Extended Download purchase (it was added to my cart). Do I need to buy this again? I got it just a couple of months ago.


You shouldn't: I'm sure the customer service will fix it for you, just contact them.


----------



## DANIELE

Markrs said:


> This is an interesting release, as I was thinking about getting Sonokinetic Strings and now this is released. Whilst this is more money, I would really like something a bit more modelled and flexible and this would fit the bill. Or I could wait for Infinite Strings?


Probably for IS you will have to wait a lot so you could also buy this. Your choice!!

I'll use both of them because I'm sure both will work well together and SM Strings is a great library already. This update brings a lot to the table, I'm in love with the new IRs, the sound is a lot better and it is easier than before to have a convincing sound (at least for me).


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

Tralen said:


> Hmm...
> 
> I was about to update but I'm in doubt about the Extended Download purchase (it was added to my cart). Do I need to buy this again? I got it just a couple of months ago.


Tralen,

the extended download is an option which is offered by My Commerce. By default it is not activated. It would be added only if you activate it on purpose.

Best,

Giorgio


----------



## muziksculp

Does the 2.0.1 update require a complete new download of the library ? 

I don't have any problem re-downloading a fresh 2.0.1 version if that's required, and actually I prefer just to delete the current version, and install a fresh 2.0.1 version, is that is possible ?

Thanks.


----------



## Fa

Before you ask...  more demos will be posted later in the coming days/weeks to showcase more of the sonic news and character, as I will provide some specific explanations to fellow users here about some of the great options the new release is offering (more realistic orchestral divisi, different size of string consorts and orchestras, studio strings for modern music, new way to get some sharper articulations, real vibrato control for large symphonic sections etc.).

Keep in touch...


----------



## Tralen

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> Tralen,
> 
> the extended download is an option which is offered by My Commerce. By default it is not activated. It would be added only if you activate it on purpose.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Giorgio


It was already there, probably because I added and bought it last time.

Anyway, I skipped it this time and I am downloading the update, thank you.


----------



## Tralen

Markrs said:


> This is an interesting release, as I was thinking about getting Sonokinetic Strings and now this is released. Whilst this is more money, I would really like something a bit more modelled and flexible and this would fit the bill. Or I could wait for Infinite Strings?


Like Daniele said, there is no ETA on Infinite Strings, so it depends on how long you are willing to wait.

I'm really, really happy with SM Strings and I will not be getting IS on release. I like to joke about this but, honestly, what I would really like is Samplemodeling _Woodwinds_.


----------



## AlbertSmithers

so exciting!


----------



## muziksculp

Hi,

I got the download link for 2.0.1 , it is a little over 5 GB so I guess this is a complete new install of the library, and I could even delete the older version 1.0.2 b . and just add this library in Kontakt. 

By the way, the serial number didn't show up in Native Access, but it did in my Native Instruments products account.


----------



## Markrs

Fa said:


> In my opinion you won't be disappointed (but I'm not neutral on it so it's very personal opinion). What I underline is that in my opinion solos and chamber are worth the price alone, and one can consider the ensembles as a bonus...





DANIELE said:


> Probably for IS you will have to wait a lot so you could also buy this. Your choice!!
> 
> I'll use both of them because I'm sure both will work well together and SM Strings is a great library already. This update brings a lot to the table, I'm in love with the new IRs, the sound is a lot better and it is easier than before to have a convincing sound (at least for me).





Tralen said:


> Like Daniele said, there is no ETA on Infinite Strings, so it depends on how long you are willing to wait.
> 
> I'm really, really happy with SM Strings and I will not be getting IS on release. I like to joke about this but, honestly, what I would really like is Samplemodeling _Woodwinds_.


Thank you all for your views. I think this will suit my needs more as Sonokinetic Strings are more similar to what I already have. 

Part of wanting to buy Sonokinetic Strings is to support a really generous and responsive developer, plus it does sound very nice for the money. 

However I don't want to buy 2 strings libraries (truthfully I have enough already) and this one is different and much more flexible. 

I will look forward to everyone's comments plus any demos whilst I think on this.


----------



## Tralen

Markrs said:


> Thank you all for your views. I think this will suit my needs more as Sonokinetic Strings are more similar to what I already have.
> 
> Part of wanting to buy Sonokinetic Strings is to support a really generous and responsive developer, plus it does sound very nice for the money.
> 
> However I don't want to buy 2 strings libraries (truthfully I have enough already) and this one is different and much more flexible.
> 
> I will look forward to everyone's comments plus any demos whilst I think on this.


I think Fa and the beta testers will be your main source of demos. The update is so exciting that I believe the others will be disappearing into their caves (I know I will).


----------



## muziksculp

@Giorgio Tommasini ,

Congratulations on the new 2.0.1 version release of Sample Modeling Solo & Ensemble Strings. 

I'm still in the installation phase of the library, so really looking forward to test the new version, and also watch, and listen to more demos, tutorials to better understand, and use this new version. 

A Big Thank You to the Sample Modeling development team's efforts in improving this awesome library. 

Cheers,
Muziksculp


----------



## Trevor Meier

Got it downloaded! I haven't figured out how to get it to show in the Kontakt Library browser. I can open the instrument files, but v1.2 still appears in the browser. Activating in Native Access doesn't do anything, as the license key has already been used for v1.2 and there's no way to tell Native Access about the new location of v2. Any tips?


----------



## muziksculp

Done ! 

Now let the fun begin


----------



## Ben H

Trevor Meier said:


> Got it downloaded! I haven't figured out how to get it to show in the Kontakt Library browser. I can open the instrument files, but v1.2 still appears in the browser. Activating in Native Access doesn't do anything, as the license key has already been used for v1.2 and there's no way to tell Native Access about the new location of v2. Any tips?


Move, rename or delete (if you don't need it) the previous folder.
Relaunch Native Access
Click repair
Add new folder location.


----------



## decredis

Only tried the solo violin so far but already can hear massive improvement in timbre and responsiveness from previous version. Very exciting! 

It's like... there's more bow and wood in it somehow. Also, a previously annoying repetitive squeaky quality to the legato transitions no longer seems to be a problem. 



Trevor Meier said:


> Got it downloaded! I haven't figured out how to get it to show in the Kontakt Library browser. I can open the instrument files, but v1.2 still appears in the browser. Activating in Native Access doesn't do anything, as the license key has already been used for v1.2 and there's no way to tell Native Access about the new location of v2. Any tips?


I got it to work by renaming the old 1.2 folder so Native Access considers the installation broken (reload NA to show this) then choose relocate and point it to the 2.0.1 folder. May be a neater way but that worked for me.


----------



## Trevor Meier

decredis said:


> Only tried the solo violin so far but already can hear massive improvement in timbre and responsiveness from previous version. Very exciting!
> 
> 
> I got it to work by renaming the old 1.2 folder so Native Access considers the installation broken (reload NA to show this) then choose relocate and point it to the 2.0.1 folder. May be a neater way but that worked for me.


Got it. @Fa maybe this should be added to the upgrade instructions PDF?


----------



## John Longley

Were we supposed to receive an email with download?


----------



## muziksculp

John Longley said:


> Were we supposed to receive an email with download?


I didn't get any email. I just followed the instructions on their website.


----------



## John Longley

muziksculp said:


> I didn't get any email. I just followed the instructions on their website.


Ok, got it.


----------



## decredis

Only minor annoyance I have with the update is that the change to the low-end velocity effect (which I get the reasons for) means that the way I normally play on my keyboard is losing some quick low-velocity notes to the very slow attack or attempted gliss. But that's easily enough adjusted to. Really love the sound now, and it's even more expressive than before too.


----------



## muziksculp

I deleted the old folder from my drive after backing it up on an external drive, I have the 2.0.1 update folder on another drive now. I just added the library inside Kontakt, and it showed the banner. All working fine. 

But, When I check Native Access, it still shows the older version 1.2.0 , so Native Access is not reflecting the new 2.0.1 version is installed. Any idea what I need to do so that Native Access shows the new 2.0.1 version ? 

Thanks.


----------



## Bollen

Loving the update so far, my only gripe is that they removed one of the sordino in the solo violin! I was using that one for the 2nd violin... I'm sure I can think of a workaround e.g. timbral shaping, but I rather liked having it easily accessible in one knob.


----------



## Denkii

I lost in the AWS lottery. 60 KB/s download.
See you in 15+ hours.


----------



## AndyP

Great news. Unfortunately I can't listen to the demo on the site, it doesn't load for me.

I will download the update shortly.


----------



## Tralen

muziksculp said:


> I deleted the old folder from my drive after backing it up on an external drive, I have the 2.0.1 update folder on another drive now. I just added the library inside Kontakt, and it showed the banner. All working fine.
> 
> But, When I check Native Access, it still shows the older version 1.2.0 , so Native Access is not reflecting the new 2.0.1 version is installed. Any idea what I need to do so that Native Access shows the new 2.0.1 version ?
> 
> Thanks.


Same here. Native Access doesn't seem to know about the update.


----------



## Bollen

Just got this at Native Instruments, maybe the culprit...?


----------



## Markrs

Bollen said:


> Just got this at Native Instruments, maybe the culprit...?


Possibly bad timing with the Native instruments Christmas give away (25% off voucher and Trash 2) which might mean the servers are busier than normal


----------



## AndyP

Same here 


Bollen said:


> Just got this at Native Instruments, maybe the culprit...?


Edit: Ordered. Now only the mail with the instructions must arrive. This seems to take a bit ...


----------



## Bollen

AndyP said:


> Same here
> 
> Edit: Ordered. Now only the mail with the instructions must arrive. This seems to take a bit ...


Mine came instantly... Check your spam folder...


----------



## AndyP

Bollen said:


> Mine came instantly... Check your spam folder...


No mail received yet.


----------



## tritonely

Very curious with the chamber patches: are these like the ensemble patches a multi patch containing 4 solo instruments? If so, do you see less CPU-usage because it would imitate less players than the ensemble patch?


----------



## AndyP

I had bought the SampleModeling Strings here in the forum from the user Proppelerheads and had terrific trouble because he had bought the library with stolen credit card information.
After I could clarify this with SampleModeling and bought and re-licensed the library there (the license was invalid due to the theft) I hope that the delay has nothing to do with the incident. Because in the order confirmation my username is slightly different than in the original order. I hope not that there is trouble again.

Anyway, I have not received any mail yet and have written to SampleModeling as a precaution.

So I can't install the update yet.


----------



## Fa

tritonely said:


> Very curious with the chamber patches: are these like the ensemble patches a multi patch containing 4 solo instruments? If so, do you see less CPU-usage because it would imitate less players than the ensemble patch?


Actually the CPU usage is not so different, because the ensemble patches are designed to build more players with a (proprietary technology of Giorgio Tommasini) sophisticated interaction of sound components and impulse response, that loads the sound engine in a sequential instead of parallel way. This approach is still demanding because anyway you get several layers in 4 modules and a lot of AI scripting to run. But 4 solos, or a chamber multi or an ensemble multi have similar CPU demand.

The good news are that all modern CPU and DAWs are managing multi thread in efficient way and so in our tests some standard actual computers, and even some not so recent systems were running the full string orchestra without problems. With modern computers (even a cheap M1 Mac mini for instance) you may play a full string orchestra made of 5 ensembles + 5 chamber multis with 256 or 512 buffer in real time with no problems.


----------



## Ivan Duch

Denkii said:


> I lost in the AWS lottery. 60 KB/s download.
> See you in 15+ hours.


Thought it was just me. 



AndyP said:


> Great news. Unfortunately I can't listen to the demo on the site, it doesn't load for me.
> 
> I will download the update shortly.


Same here!

Can't wait to start playing with it. Hopefully later today.


----------



## Ivan Duch

AndyP said:


> I had bought the SampleModeling Strings here in the forum from the user Proppelerheads and had terrific trouble because he had bought the library with stolen credit card information.
> After I could clarify this with SampleModeling and bought and re-licensed the library there (the license was invalid due to the theft) I hope that the delay has nothing to do with the incident. Because in the order confirmation my username is slightly different than in the original order. I hope not that there is trouble again.
> 
> Anyway, I have not received any mail yet and have written to SampleModeling as a precaution.
> 
> So I can't install the update yet.


I think you install the update by going to their website, using your current license and getting a discount code. I bet you can download it already by using your license. 

I didn't receive any emails either.


----------



## AndyP

Ivan Duch said:


> I think you install the update by going to their website, using your current license and getting a discount code. I bet you can download it already by using your license.
> 
> I didn't receive any emails either.


That's exactly what I did. But I have no info how and where I can download something. 
According to the order info, a mail should come, but there is nothing.

Or do I download the update via Native Access?


----------



## I like music

AndyP said:


> That's exactly what I did. But I have no info how and where I can download something.
> According to the order info, a mail should come, but there is nothing.
> 
> Or do I download the update via Native Access?


Yeah, this is the email you should have received after you took those actions, and in this email is the link which immediately starts downloading the strings...


----------



## AndyP

I like music said:


> Yeah, this is the email you should have received after you took those actions, and in this email is the link which immediately starts downloading the strings...


Thanks for the info. I think then I have to wait until the mail arrives.
In my Mycommerce account I do not see the update because something seems to have gone wrong with the user ID.
Because there is still a -1 behind my correct user ID, but there is not. No idea what went wrong, because the email address to which the info should go is correct.

But so far Samplemodeling has solved all the problems I had to my full satisfaction. Then maybe I have the chance to install the update tomorrow. It is not urgent.


----------



## AndyP

And just at this moment the email arrived. Oh how nice, then I'll get right to the installation.


----------



## Bollen

Well, after playing a few hours with the new update and also putting it through a previous project, I have to say this update is magnificent! 

- The repetitions are now super useful. 
- The chambers are very similar to the full section, but they have a delicious intimate tone.
- The attacks are much better, though not quite VSL's "harsh" attack, but very good.
- There appears to be more different body sounds, but they're quite similar, so there's that...

Still disappointed at the removal of the extra sordino in the solo, but overall I just want to say: Sample Modelling and @Giorgio Tommasini you are by far my favourite VI company! Can't wait for the Woodwinds!


----------



## muziksculp

Listening to this video demo of SM Solo & Ens. ver 2.0.1 Quite impressive how expressive, and rich these strings sound, also very detailed, and delicate sounding. 

Excerpt from Capriol Suite (1926) - 5. Pieds-en-l'air, Andante tranquillo, G major, Composed by Peter Warlock - Performed by Cristian Labelli with the new Solo, Chamber & Ensemble Strings v2.0.1


----------



## muziksculp

I'm guessing the above demos is using the new Chamber Strings ?


----------



## givemenoughrope

muziksculp said:


> Listening to this video demo of SM Solo & Ens. ver 2.0.1 Quite impressive how expressive, and rich these strings sound, also very detailed, and delicate sounding.
> 
> Excerpt from Capriol Suite (1926) - 5. Pieds-en-l'air, Andante tranquillo, G major, Composed by Peter Warlock - Performed by Cristian Labelli with the new Solo, Chamber & Ensemble Strings v2.0.1



curious how this was processed
doesn't sound out of the box (but ive been wrong before)
eager to update though


----------



## muziksculp

givemenoughrope said:


> curious how this was processed
> doesn't sound out of the box (but ive been wrong before)
> eager to update though


The update is free, you should go ahead and update to ver 2.0.1

Yes, I find the mix very interesting, not sure if it has some 3rd party fx happening here, but I doubt they would do that, since it's supposed to showcase the library without using some fancy 3rd party effects processing.

I wish they would do more in-depth video captures, and tutorials of this library, to discuss how to use it in various scenarios. i.e. this video would be a very good example of something I would like to know more about. But there is zero info. about that.


----------



## Thorgod10

Any Ableton users using this at the moment may benefit from this virtual CC board





CC Sender 16 version 1.0 by THenriK on maxforlive.com


The Free Library of Max for Live Devices




maxforlive.com





Played around a bit, the VST is wayyyyy more versatile now,
however, you're gonna have to put in a little bit of work for a finished sound.

@muziksculp if they don't, I'll probably start dishing out what I do to the sound for a starting point (not the timbral shaping, which utilization has been proven to be quite subjective)

It won't be perfect, but should offer an excellent starting point for people that want to jump in, onlooking to this thread


----------



## Trevor Meier

A sonic starting point would be very helpful. My first attempts with 2.01 haven't sounded anything like the demos, so I'd love to know how people get their tone out of the library.


----------



## chapbot

muziksculp said:


> Listening to this video demo of SM Solo & Ens. ver 2.0.1 Quite impressive how expressive, and rich these strings sound, also very detailed, and delicate sounding.
> 
> Excerpt from Capriol Suite (1926) - 5. Pieds-en-l'air, Andante tranquillo, G major, Composed by Peter Warlock - Performed by Cristian Labelli with the new Solo, Chamber & Ensemble Strings v2.0.1



This demo is the best fake strings I have ever heard. Period. If you don't get this out of the box, they >must< give us a tutorial.


----------



## chapbot

Markrs said:


> Thank you all for your views. I think this will suit my needs more as Sonokinetic Strings are more similar to what I already have.
> 
> Part of wanting to buy Sonokinetic Strings is to support a really generous and responsive developer, plus it does sound very nice for the money.
> 
> However I don't want to buy 2 strings libraries (truthfully I have enough already) and this one is different and much more flexible.
> 
> I will look forward to everyone's comments plus any demos whilst I think on this.


Listen to this



I think that should influence your decision


----------



## Denkii

I second the desire for a tutorial or a rundown of the project.


----------



## muziksculp

One of this library's attractive features is how the sound character of the strings can be customized to the type of music being produced with it. i.e. Solo Performance, or Small Chamber Baroque Style, or Classical, or even a larger string section playing a romantic string composition, Cinematic action cue, or modern minimal string style, ...etc.

One of the areas they worked on quite a bit in ver 2.0.1 is the improvement of the Timbral Shaping feature, which can change the sonic character of the strings quite a bit, to achieve what you wish them to sound like. I haven't tried using the new Timbral Shaping of this version yet. But, that's what I plan to do tomorrow, had a long day today, need a break.


----------



## Bollen

muziksculp said:


> I haven't tried using the new Timbral Shaping of this version yet. But, that's what I plan to do tomorrow, had a long day today, need a break.


I did, but only to create myself a 2nd solo violin for quick access. I have to say, it was very quick to produce! Added a bit at the top, then some middle to get a bit of nasal sound and voilà! A Strad!


----------



## muziksculp

I plan to continue my work on creating a great sounding Baroque Solo Cello using the new improved Timbral Shaping features of ver 2.0.1.


----------



## william81723

My Solo Violin's release time(CC27) doesn't work...Does anybody have the same experience too?

"Only" Solo Violin... Others are fine.

What I found is that it's lack of release samples in Solo Violin.I think maybe it's a bug.


----------



## Teldex

I bought the previous version a few months back, but found myself unwilling to put the time and energy into getting the library to sound good, so it didn't get used. It's not that I'm lazy - I will often spend hours trying to get a sampled instrument to articulate one phrase - it's that I felt a little bit lost/overwhelmed by the Sample Modeling Strings. 

So, another vote for some in depth tutorials, and some videos showing the CC automations in action.

(By the way, as some others have reported, I can't get the new audio demo to play on the website either)


----------



## chapbot

Teldex said:


> I bought the previous version a few months back, but found myself unwilling to put the time and energy into getting the library to sound good, so it didn't get used. It's not that I'm lazy - I will often spend hours trying to get a sampled instrument to articulate one phrase - it's that I felt a little bit lost/overwhelmed by the Sample Modeling Strings.
> 
> So, another vote for some in depth tutorials, and some videos showing the CC automations in action.
> 
> (By the way, as some others have reported, I can't get the new audio demo to play on the website either)


Yep.

Ok, downloaded. They literally suck out of the box. I mean, really suck. So I would pay good money to have a tutorial on how the sound in the Capriol video demo is achieved.

Like version 1, I guess you just have to manipulated a ton of parameters to get close to a realistic sound and/or have a special midi controller.

I'd love to see a preset for dummies that would have a really good sound with basic parameters built in for different styles.


----------



## Thorgod10

chapbot said:


> Yep.
> 
> Ok, downloaded. They literally suck out of the box. I mean, really suck. So I would pay good money to have a tutorial on how the sound in the Capriol video demo is achieved.
> Ect. ect.


Indeed they do, LOL.

The frustrating thing is that I had such a preset for version 1.2 that made the violins sound pretty good....but now that the sound is VERY much different,
I'm having to figure out the timbral qualities ALL OVER again.....not fun at all!

I would very much appreciate a mini guide to timbral settings...but for now, here's something
that might make your (E-Q)uest (BaDunSSS) a little less troublesome:

1. Use a placement Plugin....these strings were recorded in an anechoic chamber...so the sound will completely lack ANY room information. With a plugin like VSS 2 OR similar, you can start off with some sonic room info to make the sound a little less harsh.





2. Expose offending frequencies by playing highest dynamic. If it's noticeable with 1, it will blast your ears when every string instance is hitting the same untamed frequency.
Here's a massive offensive frequency I toned down using Fab Filter:




I start here, and mess around until I get something I like.
3. USE A GOOD REVERB. This library absolutely DIES without it. I use my M7 as a send from bus, so I can control the reverberation with each instance.

4. Use a decent musical default.
Equip your vibrato CCs to start vibrato relatively early , keep in mind out of box the library will be completely flat! Be sure to rig up 11,23,1, and 19.
Keep these mid to high, SME's ensembles are harder to blend in when they don't have reasonable
vibrato CC's plugged in.





With these tips, you will have yourself a nice little startup point and you'll be able to shape your sound from there....and remember, these plugs sound meh by themselves, but work beautifully in a mix.

Here's a clip of me messing around with it, followed by raw, out of box.
The takeaway, is that you may want to sit down for a bit!


----------



## Nando Florestan

decredis said:


> a previously annoying repetitive squeaky quality to the legato transitions no longer seems to be a problem.


You're certainly right about that.

However, did the library get even harder to use? Timbral shaping now severely changes the volume of the instrument when you have edited 2 or more harmonics? Others have praised the new shorts, I am not so sure.

I expected to just change the body of a 2nd violin and be able to play in unison -- no no no, horrible phasing even with different IRs. Why does this occur?

Still unable to imitate with SM Strings the sound of any of my other string sample libraries, cello ensembles especially. This first hour playing with SMS 2 has not been pleasant, no results achieved, I just feel bewildered.

I guess I am +1 for "give me some starter settings and mixing tips".


----------



## Thorgod10

Nando Florestan said:


> You're certainly right about that.
> 
> However, did the library get even harder to use? Timbral shaping now severely changes the volume of the instrument when you have edited 2 or more harmonics? Others have praised the new shorts, I am not so sure.
> 
> I expected to just change the body of a 2nd violin and be able to play in unison -- no no no, horrible phasing even with different IRs. Why does this occur?
> 
> Still unable to imitate with SM Strings the sound of any of my other string sample libraries, cello ensembles especially. This first hour playing with SMS 2 has not been pleasant, no results achieved, I just feel bewildered.
> 
> I guess I am +1 for "give me some starter settings and mixing tips".


Yes, the library became slightly harder to use.
The original sound characteristic was "full and dark," which made it easy to just cut and and add some air after. Now, you have to be much more surgical with your EQ/Multiband.

Shorts, same thing...they are MUCH better, however, you would now benefit from running a dedicated shorts instance and other instance, because you will want to turn CC25 down OR set a velocity curve with your shorts, then use dynamic CC to keep control.

Also I don't think this solves the phasing issue, but I DID leave some mixing tips above, if it helps any.


----------



## Marcus Millfield

Thorgod10 said:


> The takeaway, is that you may want to sit down for a bit!


Listening to your clip, that's probably the understatement of the year. Good example btw, thank you. It really goes to show what room and reverb can do to a sound.


----------



## william81723

Hey~ Listen to my new SM Solo cello~~
I spend almost 4 hours tweaking it.


----------



## Thorgod10

william81723 said:


> Hey~ Listen to my new SM Solo cello~~
> I spend almost 4 hours tweaking it.


I'll give the vst this, the solo vsts are absolutely splendid, right out of the box!
You get a nice sound and you really only need a little EQ and room-verb.
Sounding crisp 


Marcus Millfield said:


> Listening to your clip, that's probably the understatement of the year. Good example btw, thank you. It really goes to show what room and reverb can do to a sound.


Interesting enough, there's a ton of EQ and room placement which is de-crappening the sound.
I actually had to slightly turn down the out-of-box demo, because the offending frequencies were so
L O U D


----------



## DANIELE

william81723 said:


> Hey~ Listen to my new SM Solo cello~~
> I spend almost 4 hours tweaking it.


Very good sounding cello indeed. I didn't spend so much time tweaking SM strings because in my template I already like how they sounds. I'm writing a track just to tweaking them to my liking but in my free play trials the already perfom very good.

Did you use timbral shaping here?


----------



## Piotrek K.

Thorgod10 said:


> Here's a clip of me messing around with it, followed by raw, out of box.


Wow, that out-of-the box sound is incredib...ly bad O_O The processed one on the other hand is quite nice actually.


----------



## Thorgod10

Piotrek K. said:


> Wow, that out-of-the box sound is incredib...ly bad O_O The processed one on the other hand is quite nice actually.


Other libraries have better sound, but at the cost of only a bit of sound, you get complete control over your shorts, legato and vibrato. 
I think it's a great tradeoff, you just need to make special templates for this library.


----------



## Ivan M.

Tchaikovsky's Andante Cantabile. Used a dynamic EQ cut at 3kHz. If you hear some squeaking, that's added by me, it's not there out of the box. I'm not a string player so hopefully this sounds ok.

View attachment sm 2 andante.mp3


----------



## william81723

DANIELE said:


> Did you use timbral shaping here?


Yes but I've still not done yet.I need more time to tweak every section,especially cello.
I'll share them once I finish my template.


----------



## Ivan M.

Here's a heavily processed version:

View attachment sm 2 andante processed.mp3


----------



## VVEremita

Ivan M. said:


> Tchaikovsky's Andante Cantabile. Used a dynamic EQ cut at 3kHz. If you hear some squeaking, that's added by me, it's not there out of the box. I'm not a string player so hopefully this sounds ok.
> 
> View attachment sm 2 andante.mp3



The passages towards the middle/end with trills/cresc./slide work really well. All in all beautiful phrasing and pleasent sound. Thank you for showing us one of the first demonstrations of the new version.


----------



## Fa

chapbot said:


> Yep.
> 
> Ok, downloaded. They literally suck out of the box. I mean, really suck. So I would pay good money to have a tutorial on how the sound in the Capriol video demo is achieved.
> 
> Like version 1, I guess you just have to manipulated a ton of parameters to get close to a realistic sound and/or have a special midi controller.
> 
> I'd love to see a preset for dummies that would have a really good sound with basic parameters built in for different styles.


The demo is made almost with CC11 and CC1 only, and accurate velocity. All the important information about the use of the important parameters to customize your sound are in the (quite concise and easy to read) manual page about new Chamber strings vs. Ensemble.

Cristian and Giorgio will share MIDI files to let you look and experiment with the sound yourself.


----------



## decredis

Damn I must have very unsophisticated ears because the (solo especially) instruments in this version sound pretty good to me without any tweaking or effects. Ah well, makes me a cheap date I guess.


----------



## Nando Florestan

decredis said:


> Damn I must have very unsophisticated ears


No need for drama. I feel a new release creates a Reality Distortion Field, I want it to work, and after just one hour messing with it I get a reality shock if I suddenly listen to the real thing. I tried to tame SampleModeling Strings for a long time... I may be giving up now. The processed violin just a few posts above this... well, I don't think that's how a violin behaves. I wish I could pinpoint the problem... since I can't, I read like a jerk. Does it sound like the treble is almost gone? Someone above wrote these solo strings don't sound good alone but do sound good in a mix, that describes what we are seeing these days, but they have to sound good alone too...


----------



## decredis

Nando Florestan said:


> No need for drama. I feel a new release creates a Reality Distortion Field, I want it to work, and after just one hour messing with it I get a reality shock if I suddenly listen to the real thing. I tried to tame SampleModeling Strings for a long time... I may be giving up now. The processed violin just a few posts above this... well, I don't think that's how a violin behaves. I wish I could pinpoint the problem... since I can't, I read like a jerk. Does it sound like the treble is almost gone? Someone above wrote these solo strings don't sound good alone but do sound good in a mix, that describes what we are seeing these days, but they have to sound good alone too...


Sorry, didn't intend drama! I genuinely probably do have unsophisticated ears, and certainly haven't tried comparing what I'm hearing with real violins, just naively playing the SM strings and liking what I'm hearing.


----------



## Vardaro

I hope to download soon. I shall keep v.1 & v.2 side by side. I like "warm & dark" in my VI strings (and in my own playing!)
But folk have been complaining non stop about a lack of bite, crunch, etc as if it should sound as if our fading ears are 1/8 inch from the instrument. So v.2 is bound to be harder to use.
The Andante Cantabile sounds a bit "saxy" (the actual timbres are surprisingly close): I find the note-ons are neither decisive nor sweet, and the timbre lacks "shimmer". (BTW I love the sax!) And the 3kHz zone provides "projection" (singer's formant).
And why on earth should we want to make this sound like other libraries?? It should be the other way round!
Re sharp frequency peaks: I always test my mixes with two good but very different phones; but my 72yo ears stop at 10-12 kHz, so I usually round off my mixes...


----------



## Ivan Duch

I experimented with it last night for a bit, and will probably be working today with the library again. I personally use a leap motion with the library and had already a gesture for controlling the attack cc so it wasn't hard to adapt to it. But I can imagine being a bit of a pain if it wasn't part of your workflow already. 

The other thing you have to control in the library quite a bit is the attack and release speed, the attack speed, in particular, has a big influence on the type of legato you get in my experience, also velocity.

I'm really liking it, for starters I'm not getting a gun machine effect from shorts anymore, the variation is great, which allows me to do a lot of stuff I couldn't do before, including some phrases or legato ostinatos. I get the impression tremolos now sound way better, making use of the new shorts variations. Also, love the spiccato sound, not sure if that's a new sample, but sounds like it to me.

So overall it's a great step forward for the library for me. Huge congratulations to Samplemodeling for the great work.


----------



## Ivan Duch

On another note. I can't seem to remove version 1.2 from Native Access and so I'm having to open the instruments directly with Kontakt instead of making use of adding it as a whole library. Is that what everyone else is doing?


----------



## decredis

Ivan Duch said:


> On another note. I can't seem to remove version 1.2 from Native Access and so I'm having to open the instruments directly with Kontakt instead of making use of adding it as a whole library. Is that what everyone else is doing?


Just renaming the 1.2 folder to make NA think the installation is broke works; then choose relocate to point NA at the 2.0.1 folder.


----------



## Ivan Duch

decredis said:


> Just renaming the 1.2 folder to make NA think the installation is broke works; then choose relocate to point NA at the 2.0.1 folder.


I get an error when I do that saying that it isn't the right folder. I thought it was because it was a different version from what NA is showing.


----------



## decredis

Ivan Duch said:


> I get an error when I do that saying that it isn't the right folder. I thought it was because it was a different version from what NA is showing.


Ok that's odd. NA updated the version number after I pointed it at the new folder. The only other thing I did (and I honestly don't know if this was even necessary) was "add serial" the original serial. Probably wasn't necessary, but it's the only other thing I can think of.


----------



## PerryD

I have always used a breath controller for Samplemodeling stuff. I still do with S&ES but I am now using _keyboard mode_ with CC11 remapped to CC2. Now I can take advantage of velocity for attacks and still have my BC to control nuance in dynamics. A quick realtime play with violin ensembles 1 & 2 layered. (centered, so not properly panned) I prefer the dry presets with FabFilter ProR for reverb. Just an initial play test here with no keyswitches. So flexible!


----------



## AndyP

Ivan Duch said:


> I get an error when I do that saying that it isn't the right folder. I thought it was because it was a different version from what NA is showing.


I first copied the old folder to another hard drive, and removed it from the old ssd. Then I installed the update and ran the Realocate in Native Access. This worked without renaming the new folder.

I haven't had much time to try out the update yet.

This library cannot be compared with other libraries. Samplemodeling Strings require more work to get the desired sound, but one is rewarded with very good playability.

It's not the library you just throw in somewhere and probably never will be.


----------



## Fa

Nando Florestan said:


> ... it sound like the treble is almost gone? Someone above wrote these solo strings don't sound good alone but do sound good in a mix, that describes what we are seeing these days, but they have to sound good alone too...


No, they have to sound good alone, and they do. Please before agree or disagree with my statement take note of the following important technical observation:

the sound you get out of the box is an arbitrary default that you may immediately adapt to your taste and expectation with few clicks and no sound engineering magics at all.

1) test ALL the 7 impulse response with the "instrument" knob or the cc100. They are very different (on purpose) and you may find the one you like most or more adapted to your sound/project.
They are carefully and precisely modelled on the body of real fine instruments by the way.

2) the sound of the instrument is just the close, precise and anechoic-dry sound passed to FX chain with early reflections and a bit of reverb. This is for audition purpose only and it can be very different from the way you are used to listen to it (in a real life room or in a recording etc.)
Then to restore the sound image you are expecting, you may fine tune (or put to zero and substitute with the plug in of your choice) the early reflections and the position (distance, pan etc.) in the Virtual Stage page.

3) you have to familiarise with some of the important components of the solo strings sounds (namely vibrato rate and depth, noise, fingers position etc.) available with the dedicated controllers and KS.

After this quite quick and not overwhelming start-up you may find that the sound is pretty flexible and definitely realistic "as-it-is" without any Timbral Shaping (I don't recommend it unless it's really the "ultima ratio" for advanced or extreme fine tuning), EQ, and external processing, of course positioning and ambience a part (they are mandatory).

Happy to share experience and tips, if you (all) like.


----------



## PerryD

AndyP said:


> I first copied the old folder to another hard drive, and removed it from the old ssd. Then I installed the update and ran the Realocate in Native Access. This worked without renaming the new folder.
> 
> I haven't had much time to try out the update yet.
> 
> This library cannot be compared with other libraries. Samplemodeling Strings require more work to get the desired sound, but one is rewarded with very good playability.
> 
> It's not the library you just throw in somewhere and probably never will be.


I have _many_ string libraries that I love and will continue to use. I have _no_ other string library that has the nuance & playability that S&ES does.


----------



## Tralen

I gave up getting Native Access to recognize the update. I'm using the new version properly in Kontakt, but NA still says it is 1.2.

Is there a problem in leaving it like this?


----------



## Ivan M.

Fa said:


> Timbral Shaping


I'm moving the knobs, but can't hear any difference. Is it really that subtle or am I doing something wrong?


----------



## Trevor Meier

Fa said:


> No, they have to sound good alone, and they do. Please before agree or disagree with my statement take note of the following important technical observation:
> 
> the sound you get out of the box is an arbitrary default that you may immediately adapt to your taste and expectation with few clicks and no sound engineering magics at all.
> 
> 1) test ALL the 7 impulse response with the "instrument" knob or the cc100. They are very different (on purpose) and you may find the one you like most or more adapted to your sound/project.
> They are carefully and precisely modelled on the body of real fine instruments by the way.
> 
> 2) the sound of the instrument is just the close, precise and anechoic-dry sound passed to FX chain with early reflections and a bit of reverb. This is for audition purpose only and it can be very different from the way you are used to listen to it (in a real life room or in a recording etc.)
> Then to restore the sound image you are expecting, you may fine tune (or put to zero and substitute with the plug in of your choice) the early reflections and the position (distance, pan etc.) in the Virtual Stage page.
> 
> 3) you have to familiarise with some of the important components of the solo strings sounds (namely vibrato rate and depth, noise, fingers position etc.) available with the dedicated controllers and KS.
> 
> After this quite quick and not overwhelming start-up you may find that the sound is pretty flexible and definitely realistic "as-it-is" without any Timbral Shaping (I don't recommend it unless it's really the "ultima ratio" for advanced or extreme fine tuning), EQ, and external processing, of course positioning and ambience a part (they are mandatory).
> 
> Happy to share experience and tips, if you (all) like.


Very happy to hear your tips!

I’m noticing a very strong harmonic buildup around D3 on the Cello. The first IR masks it more or less, but with every other IR it resonates very strongly. 

Also for me, moving the dial for the body IRs is somewhat buggy. The first move is fine, but subsequent moves the listed IR name will not change until I move the knob for awhile.


----------



## Nando Florestan

Trevor Meier said:


> I’m noticing a very strong harmonic buildup around D3 on the Cello. The first IR masks it more or less, but with every other IR it resonates very strongly.


I noticed that too yesterday when I tried it out... New issue in this version.



Trevor Meier said:


> Also for me, moving the dial for the body IRs is somewhat buggy. The first move is fine, but subsequent moves the listed IR name will not change until I move the knob for awhile.


No, this has been the same in every version, I think the IR cannot be changed unless the instrument is silent, so it waits a little.


----------



## Trevor Meier

Nando Florestan said:


> the IR cannot be changed unless the instrument is silent, so it waits a little.


Aha! That makes sense, thanks!


----------



## Fa

Tralen said:


> I gave up getting Native Access to recognize the update. I'm using the new version properly in Kontakt, but NA still says it is 1.2.
> 
> Is there a problem in leaving it like this?


I don't think so. You own a legal licence, and you can use the instruments. Then NA is more to manage portfolio and updates of the whole NI products you own, and to get them into the K6 player.


----------



## Nando Florestan

Fa said:


> Happy to share experience and tips, if you (all) like.


Nice primer, thank you. However, I am already familiar with all that, I just find it bewildering and very hard to get results. For instance, I have been using for early reflections either the fabulous EAReverb 2, or a free impulse response called "In a Room". Then for the tail either EAReverb itself, or Valhalla, or Phoenix. The overall tone is still the most artificial in all of my sample libraries, with the possible exception of the Embertone Intimate Strings. Oh, I also try several numbers for Distance, I hear changes in the sound but don't know what I am looking for, since I am just a composer, not a mixing engineer, I do not have that kind of ear. Several of us agreed we need a tutorial, but that's got to be much deeper and detailed than what anyone could write here...

Some say this can be used in every kind of music, from Baroque etc. so I don't understand how I am getting in trouble for saying I am unable to imitate traditional sample libraries. I agree the playability is excellent, but the tone... other than the improvement in the violin squeak in legato transitions, honestly I haven't detected any improvement. Oh, and the chamber strings are a nice option, good idea. I'm just not doing chamber strings right now...


----------



## Fa

Ivan M. said:


> I'm moving the knobs, but can't hear any difference. Is it really that subtle or am I doing something wrong?


moving the knobs do nothing, unless you program before an harmonic adjustment setup in the dedicated window. Please refer to the manual and to the video tutorial (on SM website) for learning the Timbral Shaping technics.


----------



## Fa

Nando Florestan said:


> Nice primer, thank you. However, I am already familiar with all that, I just find it bewildering and very hard to get results. For instance, I have been using for early reflections either the fabulous EAReverb 2, or a free impulse response called "In a Room". Then for the tail either EAReverb itself, or Valhalla, or Phoenix. The overall tone is still the most artificial in all of my sample libraries, with the possible exception of the Embertone Intimate Strings. Oh, I also try several numbers for Distance, I hear changes in the sound but don't know what I am looking for, since I am just a composer, not a mixing engineer, I do not have that kind of ear. Several of us agreed we need a tutorial, but that's got to be much deeper and detailed than what anyone could write here...
> 
> Some say this can be used in every kind of music, from Baroque etc. so I don't understand how I am getting in trouble for saying I am unable to imitate traditional sample libraries. I agree the playability is excellent, but the tone... other than the improvement in the violin squeak in legato transitions, honestly I haven't detected any improvement. Oh, and the chamber strings are a nice option, good idea. I'm just not doing chamber strings right now...


Well Nando, then it seems you disagree with mine and other's comments, and it's totally fair, and totally valid.

I can't talk for others, but I can say from my side that the reason motivating me to support SM developers as consultant, tester and demo maker was the appreciation for the results one can get out of this instruments, and mostly the solos.

I did, as others did, some musical example sounding quite close to the acoustic real performance, and they are a bit more objective of the personal opinions. 

Still your point is fair and valid: the technology is not perfect (nothing replacing real instruments and human players) and still a single sample of a sample library can sound good/better because it's just a recording of a real instrument, but as soon as you start playing or programming it, the "realism" will be over, and SM will prevail in any blind test (as we already tested and demonstrated). 

That has nothing to do (as you say) with overall tone appreciation that is and always be totally subjective.


----------



## Bollen

Some of the comments here are bizarre! As I live with a violinist and play the cello myself, I cannot help but compare to the real thing. I have VSL, 8dio, some Kontakt libraries and none of them sound like the real thing! SM on the other hand, with the right programming does! Of course, unlike others here, I am more accustomed to the dry sound of my living room, so for me it's a good starting place.

I don't think I have the time right now to make a demo and post the MIDI here, but I'll try... No promises though!


----------



## muziksculp

Fa said:


> Before you ask...  more demos will be posted later in the coming days/weeks to showcase more of the sonic news and character, as I will provide some specific explanations to fellow users here about some of the great options the new release is offering (more realistic orchestral divisi, different size of string consorts and orchestras, studio strings for modern music, new way to get some sharper articulations, real vibrato control for large symphonic sections etc.).
> 
> Keep in touch...


Hi @Fa ,

In-Depth video tutorials, tips & tricks, demo video walkthroughs showing how a lot of what was done in detail to achieve the string sounds, more audio demos with comments about what was used, how, ..etc. 

I'm sure this update is great, but having a healthy amount of instructional support would make it a much more useful library, and fun to use. As many have posted, the out of the box sounds are not that great, so it seems like tweaking is a must even for this version. 

Thanks,
Muziksculp


----------



## Ivan Duch

If you compare the sonic quality of this library with something like BBCSO you get depressed, but BBCSO is a specialist library in that sense. It can only do one type of expression and one type of sound. 

SM strings are infinitely more flexible, and there's a price you pay for that. Now, if I forget about the exact sound of those Spitfire strings in Maida Vale and I focus on the phrasing and just use a good reverb and ERs, well, the illusion is definitely good. Won't sound exactly like other sample libraries, but will give you the illusion of a hall, a chamber, a forest, whatever you want. 

I think, unlike most libraries I own this doesn't have a sweet spot, you can get most expressions you want out of them, and sometimes that's the only thing that will make a phrase sound realistic, because no matter how beautiful the tone is if it sounds like a bunch of samples stuck together the illusion is gone. 

For me, this library is simply part of my arsenal, sometimes I layer it, sometimes it's the only thing I have that's able to phrase something correctly and so I expose it 100%. That said, after further testing, I foresee myself using this library in way more situations thanks to the updated shorts. 

I guess the bottom line is always the same. Hybrid modeling so far is able to phrase musically, the tone isn't completely realistic, it misses the nuance of all the things going on in a real performance. Pure samples will sound 100% real but fall apart in many uses. They're different tools, for different purposes.


----------



## Trevor Meier

@Fa perhaps a tutorial rendering of some standard MIDI, like this thread?






Sustained (legato) strings comparison using a mockup midi


Hi, I made a midi mockup of part of the song Music of the Night (composed by Andrew Lloyd Webber) instrumental for sustained ensemble strings. I referred to the below video (from 2:40 to 3:25). The midi attached includes only CC1 automation controlling dynamic crossfades which I think is...




vi-control.net





I'd be interested to hear SMS&ES v2 up against the Chris Hein strings rendering, for example. Going from stock out-of-the-box to some of the great tone that's in some of your and other's work with SMS&ES would be very helpful.


----------



## muziksculp

Fa said:


> No, they have to sound good alone, and they do. Please before agree or disagree with my statement take note of the following important technical observation:
> 
> the sound you get out of the box is an arbitrary default that you may immediately adapt to your taste and expectation with few clicks and no sound engineering magics at all.
> 
> 1) test ALL the 7 impulse response with the "instrument" knob or the cc100. They are very different (on purpose) and you may find the one you like most or more adapted to your sound/project.
> They are carefully and precisely modelled on the body of real fine instruments by the way.
> 
> 2) the sound of the instrument is just the close, precise and anechoic-dry sound passed to FX chain with early reflections and a bit of reverb. This is for audition purpose only and it can be very different from the way you are used to listen to it (in a real life room or in a recording etc.)
> Then to restore the sound image you are expecting, you may fine tune (or put to zero and substitute with the plug in of your choice) the early reflections and the position (distance, pan etc.) in the Virtual Stage page.
> 
> 3) you have to familiarise with some of the important components of the solo strings sounds (namely vibrato rate and depth, noise, fingers position etc.) available with the dedicated controllers and KS.
> 
> After this quite quick and not overwhelming start-up you may find that the sound is pretty flexible and definitely realistic "as-it-is" without any Timbral Shaping (I don't recommend it unless it's really the "ultima ratio" for advanced or extreme fine tuning), EQ, and external processing, of course positioning and ambience a part (they are mandatory).
> 
> Happy to share experience and tips, if you (all) like.


@Fa ,

imho. The best way to convince users about all this is to post VIDEOS showing it in action, and with commentary/narration. Please do that, or have someone do it if you are not able to. 

THANKS


----------



## Windbag

PerryD said:


> I have always used a breath controller for Samplemodeling stuff. I still do with S&ES but I am now using _keyboard mode_ with CC11 remapped to CC2. [...] So flexible!


Ok now you got my attention - this is sounding tantalizing. Other SM instruments differentiate between _Breath_ control and _Wind_ control (the former retaining velocity sensitivity that's fixed in the latter assuming the player is using a EWI or something without velocity information)

I have 2 dumb questions: 

• I see littel/no mention of sordino...does this library do that (yet)?
• what is the maximum pitch bend range for the solo instruments? Anyone using a Roli yet?


----------



## Fa

Windbag said:


> Ok now you got my attention - this is sounding tantalizing. Other SM instruments differentiate between _Breath_ control and _Wind_ control (the former retaining velocity sensitivity that's fixed in the latter assuming the player is using a EWI or something without velocity information)
> 
> I have 2 dumb questions:
> 
> • I see littel/no mention of sordino...does this library do that (yet)?
> • what is the maximum pitch bend range for the solo instruments? Anyone using a Roli yet?


Yes of course it has a sordino, for solos as for ensemble (chamber and orchestra).

Pitch bend range is customizable in cents, has a mapping, and even a microtuning set-up feature, BUT... the philosophy of the instrument is to go closer to real instrument, so large pitch bend is a wrong approach, while the AI script has some pretty sophisticated way of managing gliss and portamentos (that seamlessly connect chromatic samples, instead of just bending excessively the starting sample etc.)


----------



## Ivan Duch

I attached a very quick and rough draft (took less than 5 minutes to play this using midipaw and keyboard). It probably sounds like crap to many but it's for illustrating the sort of stuff the library can do, that no other library I own can.

For instance, those legato ostinatos everywhere, thanks to the new update I could add a lot of variation to them.

Same thing with that spiccato in the violas at the end, impossible before.

Not to mention that line in the Celli, simple line but no library I own can do that convincingly for more than a bar.

There's a lot of room for improvement in the programming, for instance the violin legatos can be further improved by programming different attack times and using velocity.


----------



## Windbag

Fa said:


> Yes of course it has a sordino, for solos as for ensemble (chamber and orchestra).


Awesome. Thanks...have I missed samples of this or has no one posted any? (EDIT: I think I found some in the older demos)



Fa said:


> Pitch bend range is customizable in cents, has a mapping, and even a microtuning set-up feature, BUT... the philosophy of the instrument is to go closer to real instrument,


Makes a lot of sense...as alluded to, I'm mostly interested in the prospect of the solo instruments on the Roli, because with <those other modeled strings>  it is a phenomenal analog for the fingerboard, and makes playing real performed vibrato incredibly rewarding. In my tinkering, the easiest way to get there is with instruments set to their 48 half-step pitch range

The challenge with all the modeled instruments I've used is supplying enough natural, human, expressive variation to avoid the auditory 'uncanny valley' that arises when software is handling (or leaving fixed) many performance elements that aren't covered by a single-event keypress...and I think that's reflected in many of the recent comments here. If you put a robot on a real violin, it probably wouldn't sound great either.


----------



## robgb

I've been playing with them for about an hour now. Like any library they take a little time, but ultimately I think the ensembles sound quite beautiful once you get to understand them. And the solos, as aways, shine.


----------



## FireGS

Excerpt from Capriol Suite (1926) by Peter Warlock 5. Pieds-en-l'air, Andante tranquillo, G major

This demo is SHOCKINGLY good. Wow.


----------



## Ivan M.

Same Andante Cantabile, but with all parts. A lot of EQ, custom early reflections and tail reverbs. I like the sound way better when the early reflections are off. Breath controller made a huge difference for expression. EQ and timbral shaping to reduce the violin bite in the treble. That's it, I've made it the best I could.

View attachment sm 2 andante all parts.mp3


----------



## FireGS

I will say this though -- why do all of the new demos sound so mono?


----------



## muziksculp

FireGS said:


> Excerpt from Capriol Suite (1926) by Peter Warlock 5. Pieds-en-l'air, Andante tranquillo, G major
> 
> This demo is SHOCKINGLY good. Wow.


Yes, it surely does. But notice how different it sounds to the out of the box sound of this library. 

I'm sure there was a lot of sonic tweaking to change the timbre, and possibly the Instrument Impulse Responses, plus other tweaks in this track.


----------



## FireGS

muziksculp said:


> Yes, it surely does. But notice how different it sounds to the out of the box sound of this library.
> 
> I'm sure there was a lot of sonic tweaking to change the timbre, and possibly the Instrument Impulse Responses, plus other tweaks in this track.


Just sounds like a challenge  I dunno, it shows that it's possible to create that with the library. That should be enough. Work in = work out -- but that's just me.


----------



## muziksculp

This library is one of the toughest to tame, and use. It would be very appreciated from Sample Modeling to release in-depth videos showing how best to use it, and I mean a good volume of videos. Not just one. 

I think the downside of this library is if I was under a tight deadline to produce a track, this will be the last library I would think of using.


----------



## Windbag

muziksculp said:


> I'm sure there was a lot of sonic tweaking to change the timbre, and possibly the Instrument Impulse Responses, plus other tweaks in this track.


I noticed an addition to the recent demos: I think you've been heard


----------



## muziksculp

Windbag said:


> I noticed an addition to the recent demos: I think you've been heard


@Windbag ,

Thanks for the heads up on the new demos. I wish they would provide more documentation/info. on what's being used in these demos, and the processing done. A series of instructional videos would be the best way to give us a better idea, of how to better use this library, and speed up workflow as well. 

So far this has not happened, maybe they are making some videos, so I will give them some time to get them posted. Hopefully they will be posted soon.


----------



## Trevor Meier

Ivan M. said:


> Same Andante Cantabile, but with all parts. A lot of EQ, custom early reflections and tail reverbs. I like the sound way better when the early reflections are off. Breath controller made a huge difference for expression. EQ and timbral shaping to reduce the violin bite in the treble. That's it, I've made it the best I could.
> 
> View attachment sm 2 andante all parts.mp3


This is excellent. Care to share the finer details of how you achieved this tone (EQ, ER, tail etc.)?


----------



## Woodie1972

I wish they had improved the sound of the Cello ensemble, I still don't like it and I can't get it to sound right, neither with EQ, reverb, compressor and so on


----------



## I like music

Woodie1972 said:


> I wish they had improved the sound of the Cello ensemble, I still don't like it and I can't get it to sound right, neither with EQ, reverb, compressor and so on


Haven't had the chance to test it, but in the previous versions, the cello ensemble stuck out as being ... the least convincing. In any case, very excited, as there's a demo or two that do sound much much improved (in general)


----------



## Tralen

It's still lying to me!


----------



## Ivan M.

Trevor Meier said:


> This is excellent. Care to share the finer details of how you achieved this tone (EQ, ER, tail etc.)?


Of course. Here's my thought process. First, although it's not directly related to tone, expression is important, because even if you have a perfect sample, it will sound wrong if it's not constantly moving. Ensembles have the luxury of a simple sweeping CC automation, but it sounds wrong on solo instruments. Each note has to move and change constantly. Using a breath controller made a huge difference, compared to manual CC drawing (previous renders I posted).

I've also automated vibrato and vibrato speed, using Logic's Modifier plugin. Because no one's got time to program every single CC. And it works quite well. Expression (CC 11) drives the vibrato amount (CC 1), so the louder a note, the more vibrato. Vibrato amount (CC 1) drives vibrato speed (CC 19), so more vibrato (and louder notes) gives faster vibrato. And as vibrato goes down, so does its speed. Which makes sense to me, sounds natural, and the sound is changing constantly.









EQ to soften the violin.




I've also pulled down harmonic #8 a bit, on the Timbral Shaping page.

On the master bus, applied to all instruments, not sends, but inserts, another EQ to again soften the mids, a bit of Valhalla Room for early reflections, then Space Designer 1.6s Short Vocal Hall.








And that's it. A convolution based early reflections could soften the sound even more. Again, I'm not a strings player and I don't know if what I came up with is convincing or not.


----------



## Ivan M.

Here's midi


----------



## Trevor Meier

Here's a version rendered with MSS for comparison.

View attachment Andante Cantabile SM2C demo 2021-12-17_MSS.mp3


----------



## Vardaro

Trevor Meier said:


> Here's a version rendered with MSS for comparison.
> 
> View attachment Andante Cantabile SM2C demo 2021-12-17_MSS.mp3


MSS?


----------



## rogierhofboer

Audiobro Modern Scoring Strings ?


----------



## Markrs

I listened to both the version of Andante Cantabile and prefer the version by Samplemodeling Strings. In fairness MSS is probably not designed for a classical style of music, though I think it does a job than many sample libraries could do.


----------



## muziksculp

Hi,

I requested that Sample Modeling post more video-tutorials for this library, especially version 2.0.1 , and got this positive reply from Giorgio on their forum. So, I'm very happy to know that they are working on posting some helpful videos for us, hopefully we will see something soon. 

Quote :

" Musiksculp,

this is definitely in our plans. We agree that these tutorials would be very helpful for proper use of our instruments. Cristian Labelli has some projects about how to implement them. Thank you very much for this suggestion.

Giorgio"


----------



## Tralen

Playing with the low register of the Viola and the bow change KS.


----------



## pierrevigneron

Thank you so much @Giorgio Tommasini ! I love sample modeling Strings 2


----------



## Trevor Meier

Ivan M. said:


> Same Andante Cantabile, but with all parts. A lot of EQ, custom early reflections and tail reverbs. I like the sound way better when the early reflections are off. Breath controller made a huge difference for expression. EQ and timbral shaping to reduce the violin bite in the treble. That's it, I've made it the best I could.
> 
> View attachment sm 2 andante all parts.mp3





Ivan M. said:


> First, although it's not directly related to tone, expression is important, because even if you have a perfect sample, it will sound wrong if it's not constantly moving. Ensembles have the luxury of a simple sweeping CC automation, but it sounds wrong on solo instruments. Each note has to move and change constantly. Using a breath controller made a huge difference, compared to manual CC drawing (previous renders I posted).
> 
> I've also automated vibrato and vibrato speed, using Logic's Modifier plugin. Because no one's got time to program every single CC. And it works quite well. I've also pulled down harmonic #8 a bit, on the Timbral Shaping page. A convolution based early reflections could soften the sound even more.





Ivan M. said:


> Here's midi


It's been very fun to play with the MIDI from this excellent piece to tease out what works and doesn't with my initial attempts using v2.01. I think the solution you came (linking expression to vibrato intensity & speed) works very well for solo strings, especially with expression between 0-80. I found it not to work so well at the highest intensities, but there might be a workaround for that.

I applied the same trick to the Chamber Strings, and the result is much more synthy. I have yet to get the Chamber section to sound as I'd like. If anyone has any tips for Chamber section tone, I'd love to hear them.

As a more direct comparison, I ran the MIDI through MSSS (Audiobro's Modern Scoring Strings soloists). I prefer the Samplemodeling version, but I'm quite pleased with how MSSS sounds - and the two together make a very nice octet.

Here's all of the renders to make it easy to compare. For simplicity I haven't used any EQ; each track could use a fair bit (plus some dynamic EQ such as Soothe2). I also re-rendered Samplemodeling Soloists with the same MIDI to match the level and reverb with the other examples.

Samplemodeling Soloists
View attachment Andante Cantabile demo 2021-12-17_SM2S v2 no Soothe.mp3


Samplemodeling Chamber Strings
View attachment Andante Cantabile demo 2021-12-17_SM2C v2 no Soothe.mp3


Modern Scoring Strings
View attachment Andante Cantabile demo 2021-12-17_MSS v2 no Soothe.mp3


Modern Scoring Strings Soloists
View attachment Andante Cantabile demo 2021-12-17_MSSS v2 no Soothe.mp3


SMS & MSSS Octet
View attachment Andante Cantabile demo 2021-12-17_MSSS SM2S octet.mp3


----------



## Ivan M.

MSS(S) has nice samples, but it obvously lacks flexibility required for this piece. While SM is more natural and it just flows. 
That's why I abandoned sample heavy libs (in favor of modeled), because no matter what you do you cannot get them to work (for anything but epic = long held notes and ostinatos) and they are extremelly frustrating. Modeled for the win!


----------



## muziksculp

Trevor Meier said:


> It's been very fun to play with the MIDI from this excellent piece to tease out what works and doesn't with my initial attempts using v2.01. I think the solution you came (linking expression to vibrato intensity & speed) works very well for solo strings, especially with expression between 0-80. I found it not to work so well at the highest intensities, but there might be a workaround for that.
> 
> I applied the same trick to the Chamber Strings, and the result is much more synthy. I have yet to get the Chamber section to sound as I'd like. If anyone has any tips for Chamber section tone, I'd love to hear them.
> 
> As a more direct comparison, I ran the MIDI through MSSS (Audiobro's Modern Scoring Strings soloists). I prefer the Samplemodeling version, but I'm quite pleased with how MSSS sounds - and the two together make a very nice octet.
> 
> Here's all of the renders to make it easy to compare. For simplicity I haven't used any EQ; each track could use a fair bit (plus some dynamic EQ such as Soothe2). I also re-rendered Samplemodeling Soloists with the same MIDI to match the level and reverb with the other examples.
> 
> Samplemodeling Soloists
> View attachment Andante Cantabile demo 2021-12-17_SM2S v2 no Soothe.mp3
> 
> 
> Samplemodeling Chamber Strings
> View attachment Andante Cantabile demo 2021-12-17_SM2C v2 no Soothe.mp3
> 
> 
> Modern Scoring Strings
> View attachment Andante Cantabile demo 2021-12-17_MSS v2 no Soothe.mp3
> 
> 
> Modern Scoring Strings Soloists
> View attachment Andante Cantabile demo 2021-12-17_MSSS v2 no Soothe.mp3
> 
> 
> SMS & MSSS Octet
> View attachment Andante Cantabile demo 2021-12-17_MSSS SM2S octet.mp3


I like the way the new SM Chamber Strings sound the most. Although I haven't used them yet, but that's one of the most useful new features added to this library, and they sound wonderful.


----------



## Tralen

Trevor Meier said:


> I applied the same trick to the Chamber Strings, and the result is much more synthy. I have yet to get the Chamber section to sound as I'd like. If anyone has any tips for Chamber section tone, I'd love to hear them.


I've experimented very little with the Chamber strings, but I've noticed they react much better to very low Vibrato Rates, so if you are linking the Rate to Expression, it is best to use a low %.


----------



## Vardaro

Just downloaded. I presume the samples are the same? So if I sometimes want to use the old unimproved "warm & dark" sounds, can I re-label and insert the v.1.2b instruments ad resources into the v.2.01 folder?


----------



## Woodie1972

It's in the installation instructions how to use the old samples


----------



## PerryD

A quick ostinato test with S&ES v2 Excuse the rambling french horn.


----------



## Thorgod10

Woodie1972 said:


> It's in the installation instructions how to use the old sample


Can you screenshot it? 
Can't seem to locate that part.


----------



## Fa

Here some chamber strings merged into ensembles experiment I'm doing. Not yet ready, just to get an idea...

Barber Adagio first bars


----------



## Trevor Meier

Fa said:


> Here some chamber string experiment I'm doing. Not yet ready, just to get an idea...
> 
> Barber Adagio first bars


The expressiveness is excellent! What are you using to control the instrument?

I’m still finding the tone of the chamber violins off somehow. It sounds like a large ensemble has been EQ’ed to sound smaller, but without any of the definition I’d expect from a smaller string section.


----------



## muziksculp

Trevor Meier said:


> The expressiveness is excellent! What are you using to control the instrument?
> 
> I’m still finding the tone of the chamber violins off somehow. It sounds like a large ensemble has been EQ’ed to sound smaller, but without any of the definition I’d expect from a smaller string section.


Everything sound off without tweaking/processing in this library 

If you are not a big time tweaker, you won't get what you want to hear from it.


----------



## DANIELE

I'm working on a track. A very simple one but I'm testing the "bombastic" side of the library.


----------



## Fa

Trevor Meier said:


> The expressiveness is excellent! What are you using to control the instrument?
> 
> I’m still finding the tone of the chamber violins off somehow. It sounds like a large ensemble has been EQ’ed to sound smaller, but without any of the definition I’d expect from a smaller string section.


I usually play with a Korg nanoPad, and/or a ROLI block pad, since I love xy or xyz controllers for strings. I find breath more appropriate for winds/brass, but not for strings IMVHO.

Sorry forgot to mention, and so I didn't explain it properly: it is a large ensemble! Chamber are merged into it to give expression and improve vibrato. That's one of the applications of the new set of tools in v2.01


----------



## Fa

muziksculp said:


> Everything sound off without tweaking/processing in this library
> 
> If you are not a big time tweaker, you won't get what you want to hear from it.


Not in my demos. I don't use any additional eQ or processing, just the instrument as they are. All the rest is just proper choice of the IR, positioning and spatialization (in my examples MIR24 or Altiverb 7)


----------



## lychee

It's been several days that I no longer have internet, and I am unable to use Native Access.
I downloaded the update through my phone, and sent it to my computer.
Being cautious (or paranoid), I don't want to use my phone's internet through my computer to run Native Access.
Is there a way to install the update without using Native Access?


----------



## Fa

lychee said:


> It's been several days that I no longer have internet, and I am unable to use Native Access.
> I downloaded the update through my phone, and sent it to my computer.
> Being cautious (or paranoid), I don't want to use my phone's internet through my computer to run Native Access.
> Is there a way to install the update without using Native Access?


Being the previous library already legal, yes you may overwrite the old content with the update and that should work disregarding NA. That was my experience and the experience of other users, BUT it is a workaround, so I can't promise 100% it's totally fine.


----------



## Fa

Vardaro said:


> Just downloaded. I presume the samples are the same? So if I sometimes want to use the old unimproved "warm & dark" sounds, can I re-label and insert the v.1.2b instruments ad resources into the v.2.01 folder?


Yes, the licence is shared then that should always work. 

But anyway, you may get a quite warm and dark sound from the actual set as well, selecting the instrument (cc100 or knob) and using virtual stage page to put back away the sonic perspective (the distance knob).

We carefully selected some warmer and darker IR in all the instruments to provide colour options.


----------



## Denkii

Tralen said:


> Playing with the low register of the Viola and the bow change KS.


wow…without a warning?
I had nam flashbacks to the ultima online login screen, hoping that no one would call my sister so that the dial up connection doesn’t drop. Good job I guess?


----------



## Tralen

Denkii said:


> wow…without a warning?
> I had nam flashbacks to the ultima online login screen, hoping that no one would call my sister so that the dial up connection doesn’t drop. Good job I guess?


I know that it should come with a warning for PTSD sufferers, my bad.

I'm deeply sorry.


----------



## muziksculp

Fa said:


> Not in my demos. I don't use any additional eQ or processing, just the instrument as they are. All the rest is just proper choice of the IR, positioning and spatialization (in my examples MIR24 or Altiverb 7)


Thanks for letting me know. I thought you did some extra editing to the out of the box sounds. Which is not a bad thing to do if you need to.


----------



## muziksculp

Fa said:


> I usually play with a Korg nanoPad, and/or a ROLI block pad, since I love xy or xyz controllers for strings


Are you referring to the ROLI LightPad BLock Studio Edition Controller for xyz control ? 

If Yes, how do you like the ROLI ? I got mine a few weeks ago, but haven't installed, or tested it yet. 

Thanks.


----------



## william81723

Hey everyone~ Just... call me SM Strings King!!!
All strings are made by SM strings.


----------



## Trevor Meier

william81723 said:


> Hey everyone~ Just... call me SM Strings King!!!
> All strings are made by SM strings.


Sounds great! Nice use of the library. What was your method for controlling MIDI CC data? Did you play in live or program in the parts?


----------



## DANIELE

Is there anyone that uses Dubler with SM Strings?


----------



## william81723

Trevor Meier said:


> Sounds great! Nice use of the library. What was your method for controlling MIDI CC data? Did you play in live or program in the parts?


I use the method called "King of SM strings",and only I can use it.

Just kidding... I just draw all the MIDI CCs and type notes by keyboard. Sometimes use fader to play slow line.


----------



## Marcus Millfield

william81723 said:


> "King of SM strings"



You should make that your signature. Sounds classy 👌🏻


----------



## Trevor Meier

william81723 said:


> I use the method called "King of SM strings",and only I can use it.
> 
> Just kidding... I just draw all the MIDI CCs and type notes by keyboard. Sometimes use fader to play slow line.


You truly are the king 😂

If you're willing to share your MIDI that would be helpful for me - even just the CC tracks with no notes. I'm trying to calibrate my Leap Motion to get the right responsiveness, and I find that especially the attack & release curves for various CC values are quite difficult to get right. Having a good example to look at can help me have a target as I keep tweaking.


----------



## Vardaro

Just been noodling, out of the box, solo violin, then viola then cello, low cc1 & cc19, low & high cc11, versions 1.2b and 2.101 side by side. The tone of v2 seems less nasal.


----------



## Fa

muziksculp said:


> Are you referring to the ROLI LightPad BLock Studio Edition Controller for xyz control ?
> 
> If Yes, how do you like the ROLI ? I got mine a few weeks ago, but haven't installed, or tested it yet.
> 
> Thanks.


YES. Well... something good, something less:
- the controller is very effective and very expressive: I use cc11 (dynamic) horizontally and cc1 for pressure (vib intensity), then I put cc19 (vib rate) in vertical. That way you can easily make gestures creating crescendo + vibrato with very natural rate changes. Wonderful for solos.

- the surface is large and a bit gummy, so smooth movements are possible only with some pressure, that you have to avoid translates into z (vertical) unwanted input. That's the only weakness.

The (inexpensive) smaller and slippery Korg nanoPad XY is the best for expressive control (cc11 + cc1) but unfortunately doesn't have the additional axis for rate. (the percussion pads are optionally also perfect to trigger KS).
But if you use pedal or breath for dynamics, then it's a very good XY vibrato controller, with cc1 and cc19 in the 2 dimensions.


----------



## Ivan Duch

@Fa, a few posts back you mention you're using Altiverb and/or MIR. I'd like to start experimenting with convolution reverbs with SM Strings, any word of advice? MIR and Altiverb are completely out of my budget, though, and I currently don't own any convo reverbs.


----------



## Trevor Meier

I've noticed a bug with v2.01: pan set in the plugin isn't consistent across various levels of vibrato intensity. For example, using the Chamber Strings Violin 1 patch, ER & Distance set to 40 and Pan set to 16, transitioning from low to high intensity vibrato pans the signal towards centre.

It also occurs without any early reflections set in the plugin, so it's not in the ER convolution. Maybe in the samples?


----------



## sumskilz

Ivan Duch said:


> I currently don't own any convo reverbs.


You probably have a stock convolution reverb in your DAW, and you can get some nice IRs for it, many of which are inexpensive or free.


----------



## John Longley

Ivan Duch said:


> @Fa, a few posts back you mention you're using Altiverb and/or MIR. I'd like to start experimenting with convolution reverbs with SM Strings, any word of advice? MIR and Altiverb are completely out of my budget, though, and I currently don't own any convo reverbs.


I use MIR Pro and Spaces II mainly, but Waves IR-1 on sale for $29 is fantastic too. The Interface is a bit outdated but the sound of the impulses are still very good. Can’t beat it for the price.


----------



## Ivan Duch

Thank you @sumskilz and @John Longley !

I use Reaper and it indeed has Reaverb. I have been playing around with it and Convology and some free IRs for the past hour.

John, is it possible to just cut the ERs of the IR with Waves IR-1, in case I want to use something else for the tail? Looks like I can't do that with Reaverb. From the manual looks like IR-1 has some nice functionality around ERs?


----------



## Markrs

Ivan Duch said:


> Thank you @sumskilz and @John Longley !
> 
> I use Reaper and it indeed has Reaverb. I have been playing around with it and Convology and some free IRs for the past hour.
> 
> John, is it possible to just cut the ERs of the IR with Waves IR-1, in case I want to use something else for the tail? Looks like I can't do that with Reaverb. From the manual looks like IR-1 has some nice functionality around ERs?


You can convert the .wir files you download to use in Waves IR-1 to .wav that can be used in any convolution plugin. The .wir files can be downloaded without having Waves IR-1. 

I have Waves IR-L which is a cut down version that works fine. This was given away free and can be found very cheap on places like KVR sell forum or Knobcloud.com









GitHub - opcode81/wir2wav: a simple tool for the conversion of .wir impulse response files into standard PCM .wav files


a simple tool for the conversion of .wir impulse response files into standard PCM .wav files - GitHub - opcode81/wir2wav: a simple tool for the conversion of .wir impulse response files into standa...




github.com













IR Convolution Reverb Library (4.8 GB) | Downloads | Waves


Download for free this massive library of high-definition impulse responses for the Waves IR-series reverb plugins, for optimal sonic depth and dimension.




www.waves.com


----------



## John Longley

Ivan Duch said:


> Thank you @sumskilz and @John Longley !
> 
> I use Reaper and it indeed has Reaverb. I have been playing around with it and Convology and some free IRs for the past hour.
> 
> John, is it possible to just cut the ERs of the IR with Waves IR-1, in case I want to use something else for the tail? Looks like I can't do that with Reaverb. From the manual looks like IR-1 has some nice functionality around ERs?


I haven’t experimented with the ER buildup control in a long time, but you can’t really eliminate ER as far as I know. You can stretch or delay the start position of the IR.


----------



## Tralen

Ivan Duch said:


> Thank you @sumskilz and @John Longley !
> 
> I use Reaper and it indeed has Reaverb. I have been playing around with it and Convology and some free IRs for the past hour.
> 
> John, is it possible to just cut the ERs of the IR with Waves IR-1, in case I want to use something else for the tail? Looks like I can't do that with Reaverb. From the manual looks like IR-1 has some nice functionality around ERs?


My favourite convolver is Fog, it has a demo. It is very useful for its limitless sound design possibilities. It is also one of the few True Stereo convolvers that I know of.

I only use it for matching dry and wet libraries, though, as I prefer algorithmic reverbs.


----------



## Ivan Duch

John Longley said:


> I haven’t experimented with the ER buildup control in a long time, but you can’t really eliminate ER as far as I know. You can stretch or delay the start position of the IR.


Sorry, I meant keeping the ERs and removing the tail.


----------



## Ivan Duch

Markrs said:


> You can convert the .wir files you download to use in Waves IR-1 to .wav that can be used in any convolution plugin. The .wir files can be downloaded without having Waves IR-1.
> 
> I have Waves IR-L which is a cut down version that works fine. This was given away free and can be found very cheap on places like KVR sell forum or Knobcloud.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> GitHub - opcode81/wir2wav: a simple tool for the conversion of .wir impulse response files into standard PCM .wav files
> 
> 
> a simple tool for the conversion of .wir impulse response files into standard PCM .wav files - GitHub - opcode81/wir2wav: a simple tool for the conversion of .wir impulse response files into standa...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> github.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IR Convolution Reverb Library (4.8 GB) | Downloads | Waves
> 
> 
> Download for free this massive library of high-definition impulse responses for the Waves IR-series reverb plugins, for optimal sonic depth and dimension.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.waves.com


Thanks a lot for sharing all that. I was about to ask you how to convert those files but you took care of that as well.


----------



## Ivan Duch

Looks like IR-1 and IR360 are both on sale for $29. Wondering if they have any extra useful feature against Convology which is free.









IR-360 Surround Convolution Reverb Plugin | Waves


The ultimate surround reverb plugin, the IR360 reverb brings the cutting-edge science of impulse response technology to the world of surround sound production.




www.waves.com





Also, any word of advice on which one to choose between ir360 and ir-1? I'm mainly wondering if ir360 would work just as well for plain stereo.


----------



## FireGS

Anyone with MIR willing to post a sample of SM solo string(s) inside MIR? I'd turn off all of the ER/IR inside the instrument, and keep MIR at defaults.


----------



## muziksculp

Hi,

Had a couple hours of quality time with Ver. 2.0.1 this afternoon, and I can confirm that it behaves, and sounds better than the previous versions.

I'm really enjoying the new Chamber Strings section. Very intimate, and detailed sounding. I'm planning to continue discovering this library in-depth, I haven't ventured into messing around with the Timbral-Shaping part, which I think has also been improved in version 2.0.1. I'm love working with this library, it's just so flexible, the type of strings Sculp enjoys 

Actually, I'm thinking about creating a new topic thread with the title :

"Sample Modeling - Solo & Ensemble Strings : Tips, Tricks, Demos, Tutorials "

What do you think ? would you find this type of thread dedicated to this library useful, and a good resource to have on this forum ? 

honestly, I find this thread too big, I personally would like a more focused resource type thread for this library, I would also invite the experts with a lot of experience using this library, and who also produce demos for SM to join in, and contribute with their knowledge, post videos, tips, tutorials, answer questions, ..etc. If that is possible. It will surely help me a lot.

Let me know if you want me to start the thread.

Cheers,
Muziksculp


----------



## Tralen

muziksculp said:


> Hi,
> 
> Had a couple hours of quality time with Ver. 2.0.1 this afternoon, and I can confirm that it behaves, and sounds better than the previous versions.
> 
> I'm really enjoying the new Chamber Strings section. Very intimate, and detailed sounding. I'm planning to continue discovering this library in-depth, I haven't ventured into messing around with the Timbral-Shaping part, which I think has also been improved in version 2.0.1. I'm love working with this library, it's just so flexible, the type of strings Sculp enjoys
> 
> Actually, I'm thinking about creating a new topic thread with the title :
> 
> "Sample Modeling - Solo & Ensemble Strings : Tips, Tricks, Demos, Tutorials "
> 
> What do you think ? would you find this type of thread dedicated to this library useful, and a good resource to have on this forum ?
> 
> honestly, I find this thread too big, I personally would like a more focused resource type thread for this library, I would also invite the experts at using this library, who produce demos for SM to join in, and contribute with their knowledge, post videos, tips, tutorials, answer questions, ..etc. If that is possible. It will surely help me a lot.
> 
> Let me know if you want me to start the thread.
> 
> Cheers,
> Muziksculp


I don't know Muziksculp. Another thread would work best if people stopped using this thread for tips, etc, otherwise we will have two competing threads with the info scattered.

In any case, I will follow you if you go.


----------



## Ivan Duch

muziksculp said:


> Hi,
> 
> Had a couple hours of quality time with Ver. 2.0.1 this afternoon, and I can confirm that it behaves, and sounds better than the previous versions.
> 
> I'm really enjoying the new Chamber Strings section. Very intimate, and detailed sounding. I'm planning to continue discovering this library in-depth, I haven't ventured into messing around with the Timbral-Shaping part, which I think has also been improved in version 2.0.1. I'm love working with this library, it's just so flexible, the type of strings Sculp enjoys
> 
> Actually, I'm thinking about creating a new topic thread with the title :
> 
> "Sample Modeling - Solo & Ensemble Strings : Tips, Tricks, Demos, Tutorials "
> 
> What do you think ? would you find this type of thread dedicated to this library useful, and a good resource to have on this forum ?
> 
> honestly, I find this thread too big, I personally would like a more focused resource type thread for this library, I would also invite the experts with a lot of experience using this library, and who also produce demos for SM to join in, and contribute with their knowledge, post videos, tips, tutorials, answer questions, ..etc. If that is possible. It will surely help me a lot.
> 
> Let me know if you want me to start the thread.
> 
> Cheers,
> Muziksculp


I like the idea of another thread for sharing tips and tricks. Demos will probably keep being shared here and this is probably the best place for that as they can help someone research the library before purchasing.


----------



## muziksculp

Hi,

Yes, I think this thread will still be a very good, and is already a huge resource for someone who is researching this library, and there is a lot of interesting info. here, but finding it in 100 pages, could be quite a time consuming task. 

I think, demos, and other misc. topics will still be discussed here. But imho. having a more focused thread like the one I proposed the topic of, will be very useful for owners of this library, and those who are evaluating it. 

I will go forward with creating the thread, and hope that it becomes a useful resource.

Cheers,
Muziksculp


----------



## DANIELE

muziksculp said:


> Hi,
> 
> Yes, I think this thread will still be a very good, and is already a huge resource for someone who is researching this library, and there is a lot of interesting info. here, but finding it in 100 pages, could be quite a time consuming task.
> 
> I think, demos, and other misc. topics will still be discussed here. But imho. having a more focused thread like the one I proposed the topic of, will be very useful for owners of this library, and those who are evaluating it.
> 
> I will go forward with creating the thread, and hope that it becomes a useful resource.
> 
> Cheers,
> Muziksculp


You must remember you have to mantain it then. You should keep the first page updated with all the tips, tricks, demos and so on. Maybe you could wait for the video tutorials from Samplemodeling itself.


----------



## Fa

Ivan Duch said:


> @Fa, a few posts back you mention you're using Altiverb and/or MIR. I'd like to start experimenting with convolution reverbs with SM Strings, any word of advice? MIR and Altiverb are completely out of my budget, though, and I currently don't own any convo reverbs.


Hi Ivan,
to get a natural sound of the tail/umbrella/overall ambience, all the mentioned convolution reverbs are doing a great job, as a single effect for the whole orchestra (it saves resources as well, of course) and you may use the SM Strings virtual stage for a better pan ( the process is: reduce Width, increase Distance, and move Pan until you find the desired position for the section or the solo. A small width and extreme Pan are requested for mid/hi distance, e.g. simulating orchestral stage, while closer distance and/or larger width are for "studio" or "close" recordings etc.). But...

The advantage of MIR (or VSS2 as an option) is combining in 1 effect chain individual ambisonic IRs and then in a very nice GUI you literally position and move your sections or players on stage with a very realistic feeling (because all the early reflection and pre-delay, and optionally even sound absorbing due to air are automatically adjusted by the software). 

It's now on sales and with vouchers (additional 25% discount) you may reach round 45% reduction of standard price. Still expensive, because you should buy MIR 24 + the stage of your choice.


----------



## DANIELE

Fa said:


> Hi Ivan,
> to get a natural sound of the tail/umbrella/overall ambience, all the mentioned convolution reverbs are doing a great job, as a single effect for the whole orchestra (it saves resources as well, of course) and you may use the SM Strings virtual stage for a better pan ( the process is: reduce Width, increase Distance, and move Pan until you find the desired position for the section or the solo. A small width and extreme Pan are requested for mid/hi distance, e.g. simulating orchestral stage, while closer distance and/or larger width are for "studio" or "close" recordings etc.). But...
> 
> The advantage of MIR (or VSS2 as an option) is combining in 1 effect chain individual ambisonic IRs and then in a very nice GUI you literally position and move your sections or players on stage with a very realistic feeling (because all the early reflection and pre-delay, and optionally even sound absorbing due to air are automatically adjusted by the software).
> 
> It's now on sales and with vouchers (additional 25% discount) you may reach round 45% reduction of standard price. Still expensive, because you should buy MIR 24 + the stage of your choice.


I would reccommend the Precedence + Breeze combo too. I use ti from the beginning and you can achieve very good results at a low price and with low resurces.
If I remember correctly with VSS2 you still have to use an external reverb plugin, pretty tricky to set.


----------



## pierrevigneron

Eareverb 2 !


----------



## Ivan Duch

Thank you all for the feedback and good tips. 

@Fa, I'm gonna answer you on @muziksculp new thread. I think it's a great topic to chat about in a more specific thread so we all share tips on processing SM Strings sound.


----------



## muziksculp

Hi, I already posted my first tip, you can see it here : 

https://vi-control.net/community/th...ps-tricks-demos-tutorials.119043/post-5007143


----------



## muziksculp

Hi,

Just a heads up on the new Ver 2.0.1 library. 

I just got an email with a download link for Solo Violin that fixes a bug it had, that under some circumstances it did not properly play some release samples. 

Cheers,
Muziksculp


----------



## Bollen

Is it just me or is it rather annoying to have CC38 on a different page from attack and release? I'd much rather have Live controllers in the same page.


----------



## ZeeCount

Anyone else finding that the ensembles don't switch to Pizz or Col Legno correctly? For me, the main instrument does, but the three others in the multi stay on sus samples.


----------



## Vardaro

ZeeCount said:


> Anyone else finding that the ensembles don't switch to Pizz or Col Legno correctly? For me, the main instrument does, but the three others in the multi stay on sus samples.


Did you remember the "sychronise" button?


----------



## ZeeCount

Vardaro said:


> Did you remember the "sychronise" button?


Synchornise doesn't affect key switch changes or CC's that have been sent to the multi. It only updates manual changes to CC that have been made using the GUI.


----------



## Tralen

ZeeCount said:


> Anyone else finding that the ensembles don't switch to Pizz or Col Legno correctly? For me, the main instrument does, but the three others in the multi stay on sus samples.


I've noticed this as well, with the chamber strings, but I didn't have the time to confirm it and had to stop experimenting for the holidays.

If you have the time, please check if the Bow Change keyswitch is working as well, as it was also behaving strangely. It will be at least a week before I'm able to sit down and test it properly.


----------



## william81723

Hey,everyone!! The King is back~(yes,it's me)
I just wrote a short piece with SM Strings in 3 hours.
I really enjoy the new version of SM Strings.
Share with all of you~~


----------



## Vardaro

william81723 said:


> Hey,everyone!! The King is back~(yes,it's me)
> I just wrote a short piece with SM Strings in 3 hours.
> I really enjoy the new version of SM Strings.
> Share with all of you~~


Excellent phrasing on the violin solo. The viola (?) at the end sounded "saxy": I would reduce/remove the vibrato delay. BTW I love the sax!


----------



## DANIELE

ZeeCount said:


> Anyone else finding that the ensembles don't switch to Pizz or Col Legno correctly? For me, the main instrument does, but the three others in the multi stay on sus samples.


Do you have this behavior on all the instruments?


----------



## Ivan Duch

DANIELE said:


> Do you have this behavior on all the instruments?


I find key switching erratic in general (sometimes it triggers, sometimes it doesn't). Particularly with pizz, col legno and harmonics. But I've been having that issue in the prior version as well.


----------



## DANIELE

Ivan Duch said:


> I find key switching erratic in general (sometimes it triggers, sometimes it doesn't). Particularly with pizz, col legno and harmonics. But I've been having that issue in the prior version as well.


Maybe it is because the KS has two different behaviors based on the velocity amount, if I remember correctly at high velocity you can press the KS once to activate the KS and once again to disable it, at low velocities you have to keep the KS pressed to get the articulation working, look in the manual. Maybe this is what is causing your issue.


----------



## Ivan Duch

DANIELE said:


> Maybe it is because the KS has two different behaviors based on the velocity amount, if I remember correctly at high velocity you can press the KS once to activate the KS and once again to disable it, at low velocities you have to keep the KS pressed to get the articulation working, look in the manual. Maybe this is what is causing your issue.


I missed that bit of the manual, that makes total sense and that's probably what's been happening. Thank you Daniele!


----------



## ZeeCount

DANIELE said:


> Maybe it is because the KS has two different behaviors based on the velocity amount, if I remember correctly at high velocity you can press the KS once to activate the KS and once again to disable it, at low velocities you have to keep the KS pressed to get the articulation working, look in the manual. Maybe this is what is causing your issue.


I've been using expression maps, and the behavior effects all the ensemble multis. It's like the three sub instruments aren't seeing the key switch.


----------



## DANIELE

ZeeCount said:


> I've been using expression maps, and the behavior effects all the ensemble multis. It's like the three sub instruments aren't seeing the key switch.


Do you have Cubase? I use Reaper so I don't know how expression maps work in Cubase, what does it happen if you try to use the KS the standard way?


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

Vardaro said:


> Excellent phrasing on the violin solo. The viola (?) at the end sounded "saxy": I would reduce/remove the vibrato delay. BTW I love the sax!


Viola?


----------



## Nando Florestan

Contraviola.


----------



## Ivan M.

Ivan Duch said:


> I find key switching erratic in general (sometimes it triggers, sometimes it doesn't). Particularly with pizz, col legno and harmonics. But I've been having that issue in the prior version as well.


IIRC, I had these issues with the previous version, it didn't want to key-switch at all on playback start. Drove me nuts, replicated across DAWs, until I discovered it just wants to start the playback with legato and then you can switch to the articulation you need. Didn't test it with the new one. (Also, as Daniele pointed out, don't forget velocity.)


----------



## Vardaro

Nando Florestan said:


> Contraviola.


Ouch! I should have spotted the pitchrange..
Cello sounds are often less "linear" (dry?) than viola (or saxophone) ones.
Their attacks are a little slower and "dirtier", even if the vibrato starts immediately.


----------



## lychee

I reworked a song I made with the old version of S&ES.
At first I found the sound quite sterile and struggled to make it sound, but with a few parameter changes I'm finally starting to find it interesting, but not yet perfect for my taste.

It still lacks life, humanity, it's too clean and orderly because it lacks a bit of chaos.
the only parameters that go in this direction are still too subtle.

Here is my totally original composition, but there is a new kid in the game named John Barry who keeps stealing my ideas: 


View attachment Golden Fingers In Your Eyes Only (Zik).mp3


It's a remix of a song I worked on in a James Bond vibe, because I thought the singer's voice suited it.
Unfortunately I can only put the instrumental, for fear of posing a problem of rights.

Here the S&ES only:

View attachment Golden Fingers In Your Eyes Only (S&ES).mp3


----------



## Cmyth_1

After seeing alot of great demos from everyone on this thread, I finally decided to pick this library up!

Spent about an hour or so tweaking the parameters to my liking, plus some additional EQ and FX. Here's a quick test of the solo violin. Still trying to figure out how to have better control over the transition from sustain to staccato, so it sounds a bit rough.


----------



## I like music

Cmyth_1 said:


> After seeing alot of great demos from everyone on this thread, I finally decided to pick this library up!
> 
> Spent about an hour or so tweaking the parameters to my liking, plus some additional EQ and FX. Here's a quick test of the solo violin. Still trying to figure out how to have better control over the transition from sustain to staccato, so it sounds a bit rough.


Nicely done! Would love to know what kind of FX and EQ you applied.

As for the room, did you add a little bit of something here too? On laptop speakers so hard to tell.


----------



## Cmyth_1

I like music said:


> Nicely done! Would love to know what kind of FX and EQ you applied.
> 
> As for the room, did you add a little bit of something here too? On laptop speakers so hard to tell.


Thank you!
For EQ I’ve only really boosted the lower frequencies, as I thought the lower notes sounded kinda thin.

As for other FX, what I’ve actually done is recorded an impulse response from my own Violin, isolated the tonal frequencies of the strings resonating, and used that as an IR to blend with the Samplemodeling Violin. I feel like it just adds a bit of extra realism.

For the room I've actually got the Reverb and ER turned off, so its just the dry close mic signal


----------



## lychee

First of all, happy new year everyone!



Cmyth_1 said:


> After seeing alot of great demos from everyone on this thread, I finally decided to pick this library up!
> 
> Spent about an hour or so tweaking the parameters to my liking, plus some additional EQ and FX. Here's a quick test of the solo violin. Still trying to figure out how to have better control over the transition from sustain to staccato, so it sounds a bit rough.



Coming back to your test, well done, that sounds good.
I just have one criticism (but this is due to S&ES itself), it lacks variety in the attacks.

One of the flaws of this library is a lack of round robin attacks which could make things less repetitive.
perhaps, in the absence of a round robin, Sample Modeling could generate them artificially or integrate various residual noises on the attacks in a v2.2 version.

Even if this V2 is much better in terms of tone, as I said above it's too clean, it lacks noises, imperfections and the ensembles are too syncronized to appear human.
Be careful, even if I criticize a lot, that doesn't mean that I don't like this plugin.
Just a little more effort guys and it will be perfect (for my taste).


----------



## I like music

Cmyth_1 said:


> Thank you!
> For EQ I’ve only really boosted the lower frequencies, as I thought the lower notes sounded kinda thin.
> 
> As for other FX, what I’ve actually done is recorded an impulse response from my own Violin, isolated the tonal frequencies of the strings resonating, and used that as an IR to blend with the Samplemodeling Violin. I feel like it just adds a bit of extra realism.
> 
> For the room I've actually got the Reverb and ER turned off, so its just the dry close mic signal


Ah, fantastic thanks! Whatever you've done with the blended IR has added something very nice


----------



## Tralen

lychee said:


> First of all, happy new year everyone!
> 
> 
> 
> Coming back to your test, well done, that sounds good.
> I just have one criticism (but this is due to S&ES itself), it lacks variety in the attacks.
> 
> One of the flaws of this library is a lack of round robin attacks which could make things less repetitive.
> perhaps, in the absence of a round robin, Sample Modeling could generate them artificially or integrate various residual noises on the attacks in a v2.2 version.
> 
> Even if this V2 is much better in terms of tone, as I said above it's too clean, it lacks noises, imperfections and the ensembles are too syncronized to appear human.
> Be careful, even if I criticize a lot, that doesn't mean that I don't like this plugin.
> Just a little more effort guys and it will be perfect (for my taste).


To give variation to the shorts, I like to play with the overtones CC.

And Happy New Year, everyone!


----------



## Vardaro

I have no time to experiment at present, but cc21 (bow noise), cc22 (overtone irregularity) cc24 (pitch shifts due to bow pressure) and cc33 (unsteadiness in tone & pitch) should allow "humanisation".
Can one randomise such controllers e.g. in Kontakt ?


----------



## Cmyth_1

I tried messing around with some randomization in pitch, but Reaper was giving me trouble trying to use parameter modulation with Kontakt, so I instead used Melda MVibrato with a slow frequency and low depth to add some subtle variation in pitch. I've also tried adjusting the attack samples through midi CC.

Here's another test


----------



## lychee

Cmyth_1 said:


> I tried messing around with some randomization in pitch, but Reaper was giving me trouble trying to use parameter modulation with Kontakt, so I instead used Melda MVibrato with a slow frequency and low depth to add some subtle variation in pitch. I've also tried adjusting the attack samples through midi CC.
> 
> Here's another test


Very good, I don't have that repetitive feeling anymore.
Too bad we had to do a lot of handling for such a result, automatic parameters would be less tedious.


----------



## justthere

Cmyth_1 said:


> I tried messing around with some randomization in pitch, but Reaper was giving me trouble trying to use parameter modulation with Kontakt, so I instead used Melda MVibrato with a slow frequency and low depth to add some subtle variation in pitch. I've also tried adjusting the attack samples through midi CC.
> 
> Here's another test


Keep in mind that when you use an external plugin, you are stepping away from the simulation of actual events. The effect of that last sample to me was of a faulty record player. And in any event that’s not how pitch would vary. It varies because of hand position and retuning on the fly, and those changes all take place on the instrument before any resonating or reverberation occurs - so when you use something external it varies those things too, hence the record player effect. VSL use a very sensible system of approaching tune and varying from it - several shapes and types, cycled through with constrained random variations per note. And SampleModeling Strings have random retuning and other similar things available. If you must apply something externally, consider using a random lfo generator to vary pitch bend very slightly. If you are savvy with scripting, you could have it engage after the onset of a midi note and reset with a note off and occasionally add a little even without a note on so it will catch some attacks. And also varying velocity musically, even more than you might be inclined to, can help.


----------



## Cmyth_1

Thank you for the advice! I'm still learning the ins and outs of this library so this is super helpful. Listening again I do hear what you describe as a record player effect. It seems I had somehow glossed over Dyn Modulation (I feel dumb haha), so I've gotten rid of the MVibrato in place of this, it does sound alot more natural this way. Though I think there are still things I can improve on


----------



## justthere

The two best things (to me) about SM strings are: the large number of ways that you can perform or edit notes over time, and the responsiveness and agility of the instrument. As opposed to traditional libraries, it goes where you tell it to go and does what you tell it to do, as opposed to playing a recording of an instrument or section striking a pose. These instruments ask a lot of the user - that the user understands what strings do, both individually and in ensemble, and can make those things happen - but traditional libraries have to be “played” to suit their strengths and avoid their weaknesses, which is one of the many reasons that scores are getting worse, in my opinion - that libraries often make decisions for composers or at the very least push them in a certain direction (but that’s another topic). 

I understand the need of many composers to obtain a certain sonic result rapidly - having to write heavy orchestra and rock band and world instruments with a short deadline gives me great sympathy for that - but to me I still get the speed and I can write far more dynamic string parts, and it’s not difficult to get a big enough sound for what I’ve had to do with the right convolution settings. (I don’t use the built-in, though it’s very nice - I use VSS2 for placement and ER’s and Altiverb and others for size and tail.)

I used these as my main strings for my part of an animated series, and was rarely disappointed in them - they did what I asked, and so I asked a lot. The only place I ever found them a little wanting (referred to elsewhere in this thread) was when I needed to do strong staccato attacks that were larger than life, but I have things I use for that. Still - some way of adding more dig to ensembles would be extremely welcome. 

A vastly under-rated thing one can do with this library and others similar to it: vary the speed of vibrato dynamically. I have this assigned to the “nod” axis of my TEControl BC2, and there’s nothing more intuitive to me than lifting my chin to speed vibrato up or lowering it to slow it down. One can think of it as conducting the instrument, or similar to what one might do when listening to a line played expressively. I have breath pressure for dynamics, bite for mod depth, and sometimes I use head tilt (side to side) for bow pressure. Those TEControl controllers are a perfect match for these instruments and those like them - especially since the bowing metaphor can’t really be reproduced by something like pressure after the fact (Roli- or Linnstrument- or GeoShred-style). I got a better result from the LEAPMotion (though it took up a hand), and imagine a better result could be obtained with a concurrent Touché or ring controller than by something with keys that respond to pressure and position - because bow movement is something that is already in progress by the time the strings are hit. The Roli and that ilk seem better for some synthesis and traditional sample playback maybe (I do use the GeoShred to control harp glissandi because it’s easy to constrain it to a scale and play it in a two-handed style and get terrific results very quickly).


----------



## justthere

DANIELE said:


> I would reccommend the Precedence + Breeze combo too. I use ti from the beginning and you can achieve very good results at a low price and with low resurces.
> If I remember correctly with VSS2 you still have to use an external reverb plugin, pretty tricky to set.


I haven’t found this tricky at all. VSS2 provides directional and distance cues, and then another suitable reverb provides tail. One can get a very nice, realistic, full scoring sound with the Altiverb Fox Stage or others, and it’s also good to shorten that one overall and add a little long tail, lie an algorithmic or plate sim reverb, at a low level. That serves as a sort of glue or “dither”, even. And multiple reverbs are what the modern orchestra score is, if you think about it - close mics mixed with room mics mixed with external reverbs. Not a “natural” sound philosophically, but like all recorded music making use of forced perspective to best effect. When I started trying to reproduce that process - because its result is what we are used to hearing, warts and all - I started being happier about my sound.


----------



## DANIELE

justthere said:


> I haven’t found this tricky at all. VSS2 provides directional and distance cues, and then another suitable reverb provides tail. One can get a very nice, realistic, full scoring sound with the Altiverb Fox Stage or others, and it’s also good to shorten that one overall and add a little long tail, lie an algorithmic or plate sim reverb, at a low level. That serves as a sort of glue or “dither”, even. And multiple reverbs are what the modern orchestra score is, if you think about it - close mics mixed with room mics mixed with external reverbs. Not a “natural” sound philosophically, but like all recorded music making use of forced perspective to best effect. When I started trying to reproduce that process - because its result is what we are used to hearing, warts and all - I started being happier about my sound.


I know, what I meant is that every time you have to move an instrument or add another one o edit an existing one for other purposes you have to edit both VSS2 and the reverb you use. I try to shorten all the things that make me spend so much time in tweaking instead of composing.

But it is a very good software and if you find it useful and right for you then it is a good choice, no doubts!


----------



## justthere

Well, I work from a template. It’s already overbuilt and I have lots of things deactivated and ready to wake up if I need them, so it’s not really a problem. But… if you want to do placement and reverb in a rapid fashion you could always use a quad FX bus with a quad panner for a reverb with a good true quad surround setting that’s close in the front and far in the back, and use the quad panner to place things and give them some reverb, but also collapse the reverb return to stereo and maybe lower the rear channel several dB. But pretty much always I will want ER and tail to be independent of each other.


----------



## DANIELE

justthere said:


> Well, I work from a template. It’s already overbuilt and I have lots of things deactivated and ready to wake up if I need them, so it’s not really a problem. But… if you want to do placement and reverb in a rapid fashion you could always use a quad FX bus with a quad panner for a reverb with a good true quad surround setting that’s close in the front and far in the back, and use the quad panner to place things and give them some reverb, but also collapse the reverb return to stereo and maybe lower the rear channel several dB. But pretty much always I will want ER and tail to be independent of each other.


I work from a template too but I often find myself moving some instruments while I'm composing because some tracks need them to be closer, others further away so even if I was able to put them at a default distance I have to be flexible to move them as fast as I can while I'm writing. This is where precedence and breeze come in handy, when I move an instrument in precedence the reverb is adjusted automatically in breeze accordingly.

Anyway your advices are precious, I'll consider them for sure.


----------



## Trevor Meier

I'm getting frequent hanging notes when working with v2.01. Anyone else also experiencing this?


----------



## Ivan Duch

Trevor Meier said:


> I'm getting frequent hanging notes when working with v2.01. Anyone else also experiencing this?


I do, I think the manual mentions a potential fix but I have yet to test it.


----------



## Trevor Meier

Ivan Duch said:


> I do, I think the manual mentions a potential fix but I have yet to test it.


The manual says to enable the “respond to all notes off” in the Kontakt instrument settings, but this doesn’t improve the hanging notes for me.


----------



## DANIELE

Trevor Meier said:


> I'm getting frequent hanging notes when working with v2.01. Anyone else also experiencing this?


Are you able to reproduce the exact situation where you have hanging notes?

It happened to me some days ago with tremolo but I wasn't able to reproduce it properly. Are you experiencing it when you deal with articulations or in a normal situation. Look at the CCs you are using, the midi items and all the things that could trigger the issue.


----------



## Trevor Meier

It’s without using articulations, but as I add more CCs to control the library, the problem gets worse. I haven’t been able to isolate yet which CC controls are causing the problems, but I suspect it’s to do with controlling the attacks. Hanging notes seem more frequent when I have rapid changes in CC26 & 34 with high velocities, for example


----------



## DANIELE

Trevor Meier said:


> It’s without using articulations, but as I add more CCs to control the library, the problem gets worse. I haven’t been able to isolate yet which CC controls are causing the problems, but I suspect it’s to do with controlling the attacks. Hanging notes seem more frequent when I have rapid changes in CC26 & 34 with high velocities, for example


Try to test the various settings one at a time until you get what is causing the issue, it is useful to understand if it is on your side or on the instrument side.


----------



## Vardaro

Wasn't this problem tackled in a Violin Solo update a few pages back?


----------



## pierrevigneron

Hello everyone.

I'm having two issues with ensemble strings right now:

1) impossible for me to redefine a cc (for me here the cc5) for "release time". It appears well in the "controllers 1" window but as soon as I turn my CC5 button no change.

2) I noticed that the attack time did not act on the notes with the polyphonic mode. It's a shame because we could have played held chords with a nice "ramp".

Do you have the same worries?

Good for you,


----------



## pierrevigneron

I put you a small video in wetransfer in the link here: https://we.tl/t-Ad0Cm2qMqW at the beginning we hear a third concern, it is the strange behavior of the response impulse change which does not always update.

Despite these three concerns, I would like to emphasize that I really like this bookstore.


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

pierrevigneron said:


> Hello everyone.
> 
> I'm having two issues with ensemble strings right now:
> 
> 1) impossible for me to redefine a cc (for me here the cc5) for "release time". It appears well in the "controllers 1" window but as soon as I turn my CC5 button no change.
> 
> 2) I noticed that the attack time did not act on the notes with the polyphonic mode. It's a shame because we could have played held chords with a nice "ramp".
> 
> Do you have the same worries?
> 
> Good for you,


pierrevigneron,

1) "impossible for me to redefine a cc (for me here the cc5) for "release time". It appears well in the "controllers 1" window but as soon as I turn my CC5 button no change".

Two different functions cannot be assigned to the same CC. In your case, remapping release time to CC5 does not work because CC5 is already assigned to portamento time. It will be sufficient to reassign portamento time to an unused CC (see below), and release time will be properly controlled by CC5.






2) "I noticed that the attack time did not act on the notes with the polyphonic mode. It's a shame because we could have played held chords with a nice "ramp"".

CC11 ramps have been designed to mimic the natural rise of bow speed resulting in a crescendo effect. If one plays bichords in solo mode, a CC11 ramp can applied to both notes, since they are simultaneous. Poly mode allows to perform arpeggios, where the notes are by definition non- simultaneous and the bow speed is virtually constant across the strings. A crescendo on each note would make little sense, besides being very difficult to produce with the current scripts. 

Best,

Giorgio


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

pierrevigneron said:


> I put you a small video in wetransfer in the link here: https://we.tl/t-Ad0Cm2qMqW at the beginning we hear a third concern, it is the strange behavior of the response impulse change which does not always update.
> 
> Despite these three concerns, I would like to emphasize that I really like this bookstore.


pierrevigneron,

thanks for your appreciation.

1) "the strange behavior of the response impulse change which does not always update".

The body IRs are applied to a convolution processor. Switching between IRs when the instrument is playing would result in a glitch. We therefore opted for allowing the IR switch to take place only when the sound is off. 

Best,

Giorgio


----------



## pierrevigneron

Thank you very much Giorgio for all these precise answers


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

pierrevigneron said:


> Thank you very much Giorgio for all these precise answers


à votre service


----------



## Bruhelius

I figured this video was quite relevant to this thread…


----------



## Cristian Labelli

On behalf of samplemodeling

*REAL or MIDI? New challenge! *

We’re happy to share with you a new challenge we are proposing on our social networks.

We re-programmed the MIDI mockup of the excerpt from Sergei Rachmaninoff, String Quartet n.1 with the upcoming Samplemodeling Solo, Chamber & Ensemble Strings v2.02, trying to get as close as possible to the real performance.

So we decided to create this unique challenge:

you will hear a series of music snippets, some taken from the real string quartet, some from the mockup.

We switched *seven times* between the REAL and the virtual quartet and vice-versa (we don’t reveal if it starts with REAL or MIDI ). We did some short cross-fades (about 200ms) to make any change not too obvious and we eventually synchronized the resulting audio file with the video of the performance.

You can try to hear the difference between REAL and MIDI and participate in the challenge by filling out the form below and pressing ‘Submit your answer’

LINK: 








Samplemodeling - Challenge


Enter to try and win a Samplemodeling product of your choice




www.samplemodeling.com






The challenge will end on *February 26th, 2022 at 11:59 pm (CET)*.


You will find more info and rules directly on the page 
*>>> AWARDS <<<*

- We will select the 3 participants who come closest to the correct answer. In case of a tie, the first to have got the correct answer would win.

- The WINNERS will get a Samplemodeling product of their choice for FREE.

- We will announce the winners on *February 27th, 2022 at 8:30 pm (CET)* and we’ll reveal the solution, making available to all:

- The audio file of the complete recording of the REAL quartet
- The audio file of the complete performance of the MIDI quartet
- The MIDI files
- A screenshot showing the switches 😀

Good luck and... ENJOY!


----------



## muziksculp

Cristian Labelli said:


> the upcoming Samplemodeling Solo, Chamber & Ensemble Strings v2.02


@Cristian Labelli ,

Thanks for letting us know about this upcoming update. v2.02 

I wonder what has been further improved in this update.


----------



## Fa

muziksculp said:


> @Cristian Labelli ,
> 
> Thanks for letting us know about this upcoming update. v2.02
> 
> I wonder what has been further improved in this update.


You will see soon, but summarizing: Improved attack control, improved Chamber dynamics, and few bug fixes.


----------



## muziksculp

Fa said:


> You will see soon, but summarizing: Improved attack control, improved Chamber dynamics, and few bug fixes.


THANKS


----------



## mozart999uk

I can't wait for those midi files!


----------



## muziksculp

I wish there was a good collection of Sample Modeling Video Tutorials for the Solo & Ensemble Strings, that show how to best use them in various musical scenarios, and go in depth explaining the midi techniques that would be recommended for these scenarios. This would be so helpful to many users of this library.


----------



## Bollen

Cristian Labelli said:


> On behalf of samplemodeling
> 
> *REAL or MIDI? New challenge! *
> 
> We’re happy to share with you a new challenge we are proposing on our social networks.
> 
> We re-programmed the MIDI mockup of the excerpt from Sergei Rachmaninoff, String Quartet n.1 with the upcoming Samplemodeling Solo, Chamber & Ensemble Strings v2.02, trying to get as close as possible to the real performance.
> 
> So we decided to create this unique challenge:
> 
> you will hear a series of music snippets, some taken from the real string quartet, some from the mockup.
> 
> We switched *seven times* between the REAL and the virtual quartet and vice-versa (we don’t reveal if it starts with REAL or MIDI ). We did some short cross-fades (about 200ms) to make any change not too obvious and we eventually synchronized the resulting audio file with the video of the performance.
> 
> You can try to hear the difference between REAL and MIDI and participate in the challenge by filling out the form below and pressing ‘Submit your answer’
> 
> LINK:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Samplemodeling - Challenge
> 
> 
> Enter to try and win a Samplemodeling product of your choice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.samplemodeling.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The challenge will end on *February 26th, 2022 at 11:59 pm (CET)*.
> 
> 
> You will find more info and rules directly on the page
> *>>> AWARDS <<<*
> 
> - We will select the 3 participants who come closest to the correct answer. In case of a tie, the first to have got the correct answer would win.
> 
> - The WINNERS will get a Samplemodeling product of their choice for FREE.
> 
> - We will announce the winners on *February 27th, 2022 at 8:30 pm (CET)* and we’ll reveal the solution, making available to all:
> 
> - The audio file of the complete recording of the REAL quartet
> - The audio file of the complete performance of the MIDI quartet
> - The MIDI files
> - A screenshot showing the switches 😀
> 
> Good luck and... ENJOY!


This is such a brave thing to do for a developer, I tip my hat in respect! 

Unfortunately I already have all SM instruments, so no point participating!


----------



## Fa

Bollen said:


> This is such a brave thing to do for a developer, I tip my hat in respect!
> 
> Unfortunately I already have all SM instruments, so no point participating!


LOL this is not an excuse... you may try for the spirit of Olympics


----------



## Ivan M.

Cristian Labelli said:


> On behalf of samplemodeling
> 
> *REAL or MIDI? New challenge! *
> 
> We’re happy to share with you a new challenge we are proposing on our social networks.
> 
> We re-programmed the MIDI mockup of the excerpt from Sergei Rachmaninoff, String Quartet n.1 with the upcoming Samplemodeling Solo, Chamber & Ensemble Strings v2.02, trying to get as close as possible to the real performance.
> 
> So we decided to create this unique challenge:
> 
> you will hear a series of music snippets, some taken from the real string quartet, some from the mockup.
> 
> We switched *seven times* between the REAL and the virtual quartet and vice-versa (we don’t reveal if it starts with REAL or MIDI ). We did some short cross-fades (about 200ms) to make any change not too obvious and we eventually synchronized the resulting audio file with the video of the performance.
> 
> You can try to hear the difference between REAL and MIDI and participate in the challenge by filling out the form below and pressing ‘Submit your answer’
> 
> LINK:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Samplemodeling - Challenge
> 
> 
> Enter to try and win a Samplemodeling product of your choice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.samplemodeling.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The challenge will end on *February 26th, 2022 at 11:59 pm (CET)*.
> 
> 
> You will find more info and rules directly on the page
> *>>> AWARDS <<<*
> 
> - We will select the 3 participants who come closest to the correct answer. In case of a tie, the first to have got the correct answer would win.
> 
> - The WINNERS will get a Samplemodeling product of their choice for FREE.
> 
> - We will announce the winners on *February 27th, 2022 at 8:30 pm (CET)* and we’ll reveal the solution, making available to all:
> 
> - The audio file of the complete recording of the REAL quartet
> - The audio file of the complete performance of the MIDI quartet
> - The MIDI files
> - A screenshot showing the switches 😀
> 
> Good luck and... ENJOY!


This is really impressive! I think I can hear where the mock is in the first half, but it's very subtle. Fantastic!


----------



## Tralen

Bollen said:


> This is such a brave thing to do for a developer, I tip my hat in respect!
> 
> Unfortunately I already have all SM instruments, so no point participating!


Maybe they can give you a voucher for future instruments?


----------



## I like music

Tralen said:


> Maybe they can give you a voucher for future instruments?


Now we're talking!


----------



## zigzag

I'll admit it. This is harder than I've expected.


----------



## I like music

zigzag said:


> I'll admit it. This is harder than I've expected.


That's what sh... 

But yes, agreed!


----------



## Ivan M.

Fa said:


> You will see soon, but summarizing: Improved attack control, improved Chamber dynamics, and few bug fixes.


Please fix the bug where the playback always needs to start with C keyswitch before switching to another (pizzicato). If there’s only pizz keyswitch it will switch to pizz only on every second playback start.


----------



## DANIELE

Ivan M. said:


> Please fix the bug where the playback always needs to start with C keyswitch before switching to another (pizzicato). If there’s only pizz keyswitch it will switch to pizz only on every second playback start.



Do you know about the velocity thing?


----------



## Ivan M.

DANIELE said:


> Do you know about the velocity thing?


Yes, I always put them at 127


----------



## DANIELE

Ivan M. said:


> Yes, I always put them at 127


Maybe this is why you have that behavior. Putting the KS velocity at high values means that you are toggling the KS so usually you have an ON/OFF behavior at every playback start.

To avoid that I use the other mode, I put KS velocity at low values and I draw the KS all along under the note (or notes) I want to behave with that specific articulation.

Look if this is the case.


----------



## Vardaro

For "The Challenge", I imagine the muscians used the same instruments as in the samples, which in turn used a room IR recorded in the same room as the musicians.

I might find subtle inconsistences in the reverb, and minute intonation slips, but I can't win this contest!


----------



## muziksculp

I would like to hear an official demo Sample Modeling demo/s using the String Ensembles in ver 2.0.1 

I don't think any official demos of the String Ensembles using ver 2.0.1 exists, or did I miss it ?


----------



## Fa

muziksculp said:


> I would like to hear an official demo Sample Modeling demo/s using the String Ensembles in ver 2.0.1
> 
> I don't think any official demos of the String Ensembles using ver 2.0.1 exists, or did I miss it ?


Coming soon... stay tuned


----------



## Fa

Vardaro said:


> For "The Challenge", I imagine the muscians used the same instruments as in the samples, which in turn used a room IR recorded in the same room as the musicians.
> 
> I might find subtle inconsistences in the reverb, and minute intonation slips, but I can't win this contest!


Not exactly the process, but "kind of": don't forget the proprietary technology of Smaplemodeling for replicating the acoustic fingerprints of instruments in a dry format. 

This is providing users as well with the best starting point ever for matching spectrum and ambience of any target sound, using common plug-ins and simple technics, available to all of us, not just to the developers.


----------



## muziksculp

Fa said:


> Coming soon... stay tuned


OK. great, I'm tuned in !

📻


----------



## Tralen

Hello, everyone,

I have a few requests regarding CC handling for an upcoming update:

*Free reassignment of the Bow Change/Detaché CC*: Currently, it is hardcoded to CC64 and it isn't represented anywhere on the UI, so we can't override it. I would like to use CC64 for something else and still be able to use another CC for this function. The only alternative is using the Keyswitch D.

*Better handling of CC7 for Ensembles*: Currently, CC7 can be reassigned for the Solo instruments, but it is hardcoded* for the Ensembles, and for these, it seems to work _only as an attenuator_, as it doesn't provide a way to configure the volume range, like Kontakt normally does. So I request an option to properly reassign CC7 and to also set the volume range for Ensembles.
 * On the Ensembles, there is a configuration on page "CC Mapping 4" for reassigning the Volume CC, but it doesn't appear to do anything.

Thank you.

(Please tell me if I missed something regarding these.)


----------



## Bollen

Tralen said:


> Hello, everyone,
> 
> I have a few requests regarding CC handling for an upcoming update:
> 
> *Free reassignment of the Bow Change/Detaché CC*: Currently, it is hardcoded to CC64 and it isn't represented anywhere on the UI, so we can't override it. I would like to use CC64 for something else and still be able to use another CC for this function. The only alternative is using the Keyswitch D.
> 
> *Better handling of CC7 for Ensembles*: Currently, CC7 can be reassigned for the Solo instruments, but it is hardcoded* for the Ensembles, and for these, it seems to work _only as an attenuator_, as it doesn't provide a way to configure the volume range, like Kontakt normally does. So I request an option to properly reassign CC7 and to also set the volume range for Ensembles.
> * On the Ensembles, there is a configuration on page "CC Mapping 4" for reassigning the Volume CC, but it doesn't appear to do anything.
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> (Please tell me if I missed something regarding these.)


Doesn't the detaché show up in the main window? At least in terms of saying it's playing detaché...?

+1 for the CC7 request!


----------



## PerryD

Tralen said:


> Hello, everyone,
> 
> I have a few requests regarding CC handling for an upcoming update:
> 
> *Free reassignment of the Bow Change/Detaché CC*: Currently, it is hardcoded to CC64 and it isn't represented anywhere on the UI, so we can't override it. I would like to use CC64 for something else and still be able to use another CC for this function. The only alternative is using the Keyswitch D.
> 
> *Better handling of CC7 for Ensembles*: Currently, CC7 can be reassigned for the Solo instruments, but it is hardcoded* for the Ensembles, and for these, it seems to work _only as an attenuator_, as it doesn't provide a way to configure the volume range, like Kontakt normally does. So I request an option to properly reassign CC7 and to also set the volume range for Ensembles.
> * On the Ensembles, there is a configuration on page "CC Mapping 4" for reassigning the Volume CC, but it doesn't appear to do anything.
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> (Please tell me if I missed something regarding these.)


CC64, as a standard, is assigned to the sustain pedal only, and cannot be remapped. The ensemble volume can be controlled in the same way as the solo instruments. The only difference is that you do not see the volume sliders moving (due to a protection mechanism of the ensemble modules). And - both are working as attenuators, not only the ensembles, i.e. you cannot go above 0 dB. Otherwise this would lead to an overload/clipping when playing the loudest articulations. If you do want a higher level, and you cannot do it in the channel your Kontakt player is assigned to, you still have the option to (permanently) raise the output level using the Master Volume knob in the Kontakt master section. This way you define the overall volume range driven by CC7 and can go as far as + 36 dB 

Remapping CC7 is, by the way, also possible with Ensembles (see Remap menu no. 4; do not forget to synchronize the modules), provided that the new controller is not already used to control another parameter.


----------



## Tralen

PerryD said:


> CC64, as a standard, is assigned to the sustain pedal only, and cannot be remapped. The ensemble volume can be controlled in the same way as the solo instruments. The only difference is that you do not see the volume sliders moving (due to a protection mechanism of the ensemble modules). And - both are working as attenuators, not only the ensembles, i.e. you cannot go above 0 dB. Otherwise this would lead to an overload/clipping when playing the loudest articulations. If you do want a higher level, and you cannot do it in the channel your Kontakt player is assigned to, you still have the option to (permanently) raise the output level using the Master Volume knob in the Kontakt master section. This way you define the overall volume range driven by CC7 and can go as far as + 36 dB
> 
> Remapping CC7 is, by the way, also possible with Ensembles (see Remap menu no. 4; do not forget to synchronize the modules), provided that the new controller is not already used to control another parameter.


Hi, Perry,

Regarding CC64, I would like an option to remap _the articulation_. As @Bollen noted, the Detaché articulation shows up in the main window, but I can't reassign it. I have to use a plugin just to remap the CC I'm using to CC64, and it seems silly that this is the case when every other parameter can be remapped in the instrument itself.

Thanks for clarifying about CC7. I was able to reassign it for the Ensembles. I guess I had an overriding control somewhere. Still, I would like to be able to set the Max volume, as it is possible for every other Kontakt instrument. I'm very careful with gain staging and I use the Master Volume to give me plenty of headroom. Controlling Volume in conjunction with Expression is important for my workflow in playing live with an EWI.

The Solo instruments do allow me to set the maximum to +6dB or +12dB using Kontakt's option: Edit Mode -> Instrument Options -> Midi Controler #7 (Volume) range. For the Ensembles, I have to compensate with a Volume plugin so that the zero value (CC7=80) is the same as the other instruments.


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

Tralen said:


> Hi, Perry,
> 
> Regarding CC64, I would like an option to remap _the articulation_. As @Bollen noted, the Detaché articulation shows up in the main window, but I can't reassign it. I have to use a plugin just to remap the CC I'm using to CC64, and it seems silly that this is the case when every other parameter can be remapped in the instrument itself.
> 
> Thanks for clarifying about CC7. I was able to reassign it for the Ensembles. I guess I had an overriding control somewhere. Still, I would like to be able to set the Max volume, as it is possible for every other Kontakt instrument. I'm very careful with gain staging and I use the Master Volume to give me plenty of headroom. Controlling Volume in conjunction with Expression is important for my workflow in playing live with an EWI.
> 
> The Solo instruments do allow me to set the maximum to +6dB or +12dB using Kontakt's option: Edit Mode -> Instrument Options -> Midi Controler #7 (Volume) range. For the Ensembles, I have to compensate with a Volume plugin so that the zero value (CC7=80) is the same as the other instruments.


Tralen,

I'm not sure about what you mean by reassigning an articulation. What you can reassign is a parameter, or function, like expression or vibrato to a CC.

Ensemble instruments have been titrated to zero dB, because further amplification, at the nkm level, would lead to saturation. You wrote: _ For the Ensembles, I have to compensate with a Volume plugin so that the zero value (CC7=80) is the same as the other instruments_. To this purpose, you don't need a volume plugin. If further amplification is wanted, what you have to do is to enamble Master Vol (F4) in the Kontakt drop down menu, and you will get the option of setting whatever volume level you need, by acting on it.





_I have to use a plugin just to remap the CC I'm using to CC64, and it seems silly that this is the case when every other parameter can be remapped in the instrument itself._

The case of CC64 is slightly different from other CCs. As discussed in other forums, it can probably be reassigned to other CCs. However, please have a look at this:






Kontakt assumes that CC64 is assigned to the Sustain Pedal, and offers three option which can be selected by the user: 






What will happen if these options are applied to a remapped CC is not known. For that reason we opted for maintaining the default assignment of CC64 to the sustain pedal. 

Best,

Giorgio


----------



## Tralen

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> Tralen,
> 
> I'm not sure about what you mean by reassigning an articulation. What you can reassign is a parameter, or function, like expression or vibrato to a CC.
> 
> Ensemble instruments have been titrated to zero dB, because further amplification, at the nkm level, would lead to saturation. You wrote: _ For the Ensembles, I have to compensate with a Volume plugin so that the zero value (CC7=80) is the same as the other instruments_. To this purpose, you don't need a volume plugin. If further amplification is wanted, what you have to do is to enamble Master Vol (F4) in the Kontakt drop down menu, and you will get the option of setting whatever volume level you need, by acting on it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _I have to use a plugin just to remap the CC I'm using to CC64, and it seems silly that this is the case when every other parameter can be remapped in the instrument itself._
> 
> The case of CC64 is slightly different from other CCs. As discussed in other forums, it can probably be reassigned to other CCs. However, please have a look at this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kontakt assumes that CC64 is assigned to the Sustain Pedal, and offers three option which can be selected by the user:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What will happen if these options are applied to a remapped CC is not known. For that reason we opted for maintaining the default assignment of CC64 to the sustain pedal.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Giorgio


Thanks a lot, Giorgio.

I think I've setup a method to overcome the Volume limitation. Thanks again.

Regarding CC64, I just want to assign a different CC (CC17) to control the Bow Change/Detaché, instead of CC64.


----------



## muziksculp

@Giorgio Tommasini ,

I see you are using ver 2.0.2 

Looking forward to the new improvements ver 2.0.2 will offer.

I'm still waiting for some in-depth video tutorials, and some official demo/s showing the Solos and Ensembles of the new version 2.0.1 or 2.0.2 , I don't think I heard any of the String Ensembles used in your official demos yet.

The Solo Strings sound amazing as demonstrated in the Challenge video, and other posted video a little while back.

Thanks,
Muziksculp


----------



## Thorgod10

The solo ensembles have always sounded great, but I'm STILL really waiting for the mold-busting capabilities of ensembles to be shown off. Sadly, my templates simply don't work with the new layout/sound, so I'm waiting for a version to settle before I do all the plugging all over again. 
(I tried using it for commission, and for the sake of time it...didn't hold up too well given the former statement)


----------



## philippe goi

Small Mozart Test Chamber Strings!


----------



## Cristian Labelli

philippe goi said:


> Small Mozart Test Chamber Strings!


Great mockup, Philippe!


----------



## philippe goi

Cristian Labelli said:


> Great mockup, Philippe!


Thank you! and congratulations again for your fantastic demonstrations .


----------



## Vardaro

"Is the violin difficult?"
"Easy to play, hard to learn..."


----------



## Cristian Labelli

Hi all!

The challenge came to an end, leaving us overwhelmed by hundreds of submissions!
We are grateful to all of you for participating and dedicating time to this unique challenge. We have analyzed all the answers and we finally have the names of the 3 winners:





Congratulations to:







1st: Christopher Cook



2nd: Jason Zaffary



3rd: Robert Osztolykan

To reward their excellent performance, we decided to give the prize to two further participants who scored like our 3rd winner, but with a very slight delay:




4th: Johannes Hubner



5th: Matteo Mizera

To select the winners, we used the following criteria:
1) Correct identification of Real vs MIDI
2) Overall deviation in seconds from the correct values, reported below:

The piece starts at 00:28 with REAL
At 00:32 it switches to MIDI
At 00:38 it switches to REAL
At 00:44 it switches to MIDI
At 00:54 it switches to REAL
At 00:58 it switches to MIDI
At 01:05 it switches to REAL
At 01:10 it switches to MIDI

Here are some interesting data from the analysis of the responses:
- 0,00% of the participants spotted ALL the switches!
- 3,55% of the participants were able to hear the 7 switches with a total deviation of 7 seconds or lower
- 45,56% of the participants were unable to distinguish between the REAL and the MIDI sections, quite a remarkable result!

Here is the link where you can find the material we promised:








__





Samplemodeling Challenge - REVEAL - Google Drive







drive.google.com





Thank you again for participating!

Cristian


----------



## ChoPraTs

Congratulations to the winners!

And thank you very much to the Sample Modeling Team for this challenge!

It was very funny and a very interesting experience. I think it demonstrates the incredible playability of this software and its very realistic sound. I shared the challenge with other composers and also shared the link to my students and no one was able to distinguish between the REAL and the MIDI Sections.

Me neither, hehe. Although I think I was close to guess the 7 switches, I thought the piece started with MIDI when it started in REAL. So, I think this challenge showed us that a very nice programming/editing task with this software can fool anyone.

It has not been this time, but I hope in the future to have the opportunity to get this library which I knew about recently and that surprises me more and more after each new demo.


----------



## Fa

And by the way, finally the 2.02 update is available to all the users!

the 2.02 update is available now!


----------



## Trevor Meier

Just updated to v2.02. It's a very nice upgrade!

I've noticed what appears to be a bad/strange sample out of the box in the upper range of the solo Double Bass, at A and G# below middle C. The timbre is significantly different from the surrounding notes. Anyone else notice this?


----------



## muziksculp

Trevor Meier said:


> Just updated to v2.02. It's a very nice upgrade!
> 
> I've noticed what appears to be a bad/strange sample out of the box in the upper range of the solo Double Bass, at A and G# below middle C. The timbre is significantly different from the surrounding notes. Anyone else notice this?


I tested the entire range of the v.2.0.2 Solo Double Bass, and I don't hear anything odd with the way it sounds on any of the notes played. Don't forget that a DB will not resonate as much at the higher note ranges like it does at the lower, and mid ranges, so there will be a noticeable timbre change at the higher notes you mention, but that's very normal. 

Here is a play of the entire range of the DB Solo played chromatically from lowest note to highest note. 

View attachment Sample Modeling Bass Notes Test.mp3


----------



## Fibigero

Would love to hear how the ensemble strings sound when doing string runs ala Hedwigs theme.


----------



## Jish

Fibigero said:


> Would love to hear how the ensemble strings sound when doing string runs ala Hedwigs theme.


Speaking of JW ensemble-centric string writing, it would also be interesting to hear some more melodic 'breathing' and perhaps even at times more 'soaring' examples such as the thematic writing of JP or ET (which most even current libraries tend to crash and burn on for a myriad reasons).

The Peter Warlock example is giving real glimpses of promise towards more emotionally interesting possibilities, so I think some of the more well-known and thematic heavy writing of Williams could make for a very interesting exercise.


----------



## Fibigero

Jish said:


> Speaking of JW ensemble-centric string writing, it would also be interesting to hear some more melodic 'breathing' and perhaps even at times more 'soaring' examples such as the thematic writing of JP or ET (which most even current libraries tend to crash and burn on for a myriad reasons).
> 
> The Peter Warlock example is giving real glimpses of promise towards more emotionally interesting possibilities, so I think some of the more well-known and thematic heavy writing of Williams could make for a very interesting exercise.


I hope someone who owns the library can make such a demo. Because I am currently frankly not really convinced by the ensemble sound. It still sounds synthy. Love the solo sounds though, find them very real sounding


----------



## Trevor Meier

muziksculp said:


> I tested the entire range of the v.2.0.2 Solo Double Bass, and I don't hear anything odd with the way it sounds on any of the notes played. Don't forget that a DB will not resonate as much at the higher note ranges like it does at the lower, and mid ranges, so there will be a noticeable timbre change at the higher notes you mention, but that's very normal.
> 
> Here is a play of the entire range of the DB Solo played chromatically from lowest note to highest note.
> 
> View attachment Sample Modeling Bass Notes Test.mp3


I hear it in your example as well. G# & A below middle C have quite a different timbre compared to the notes directly before and after (as do some of the higher notes)


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

Fibigero said:


> I hope someone who owns the library can make such a demo. Because I am currently frankly not really convinced by the ensemble sound. It still sounds synthy. Love the solo sounds though, find them very real sounding


Does the demo made by Cristian Labelli sound synthy as well to your ears? If not, why are you asking for a similar demo by someone owning these virtual instruments? If Cristian could this in a few hours, it simply means that our virtual instruments are capable, if suitable played, of mimicking credible ensemble strings. If, conversely, Cristian's demo does sound synthy to you, please compare your opinion with others'. Synthy has become a "magic" word, mainly used to blame whatever sound comes out from whatever recording that one doesn't like. Could you perhaps explain the exact meaning of this magic word? By synthy do you mean fake?


----------



## Giorgio Tommasini

Trevor Meier said:


> I hear it in your example as well. G# & A below middle C have quite a different timbre compared to the notes directly before and after (as do some of the higher notes)


Are you sure that a different timbre compared to the adjacent notes is not peculiar to a real instrument? Our instruments are sample-based, not synthesized. If there are timbral discontinuities across the instrument range, they belong to the original samples.


----------



## muziksculp

Trevor Meier said:


> I hear it in your example as well. G# & A below middle C have quite a different timbre compared to the notes directly before and after (as do some of the higher notes)


As I mentioned, the timbre changes are not odd, but naturally happen due to the structure of the instrument, and the different resonances of each note, especially at these higher ranges for a Bass Instrument. Also @Giorgio Tommasini has confirmed this in his post above, these are actual samples recorded from the instrument. There is nothing wrong with their timbre.


----------



## Trevor Meier

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> Are you sure that a different timbre compared to the adjacent notes is not peculiar to a real instrument? Our instruments are sample-based, not synthesized. If there are timbral discontinuities across the instrument range, they belong to the original samples.


Yes, I’m saying that the sample used for G#/A have a different timbre, but that unlike the steady progression of timbres with other adjacent samples, this one sticks out. Looking at it on spectrum analyzer, it seems to have quite a bit less of the lower frequencies than the samples both above and below it’s range.


----------



## muziksculp

Trevor Meier said:


> Yes, I’m saying that the sample used for G#/A have a different timbre, but that unlike the steady progression of timbres with other adjacent samples, this one sticks out.


I hear the change of timbre on the G# below Middle C, but also that same timbre quality on all the chromatic notes going up the range of the DBass.


----------



## Fibigero

Giorgio Tommasini said:


> Does the demo made by Cristian Labelli sound synthy as well to your ears? If not, why are you asking for a similar demo by someone owning these virtual instruments? If Cristian could this in a few hours, it simply means that our virtual instruments are capable, if suitable played, of mimicking credible ensemble strings. If, conversely, Cristian's demo does sound synthy to you, please compare your opinion with others'. Synthy has become a "magic" word, mainly used to blame whatever sound comes out from whatever recording that one doesn't like. Could you perhaps explain the exact meaning of this magic word? By synthy do you mean fake?


Thanks for your reply. The demos by Labelli sound fine to me, but they are mostly slower pieces. I was (in an earlier comment) referring to faster string passages, the type we see in John Williams Hedwig Theme for example, that I was curious to hear how it would sound with this library.
The synthy comment was in regard to the demo "R.Strauss - Ein Heldenleben Op.40: for large symphonic orchestra". In that demo there are a few passages that are a bit faster (some 16th note moments I assume). With "synthy" I meant to be closer to the sound of an electronically produced string sound (think of sibelius default onboard soundset) than a real string sound that would play such a passage. (I compared that section with some live recordings of that piece to see how it sounds there).
I'm sure in future updates that gap will get smaller and smaller.


----------



## Trevor Meier

Here's a video showing the solo bass in a spectrum analyzer. There's a ~30dB difference in frequency response around 100Hz from G3 to A3. This is completely dry, no ER, reverb or any other FX, with all notes set to the same velocity & CC values.

View attachment SM Solo Bass frequency response around A3-1080P MP4.mp4


----------



## Bollen

Fibigero said:


> The synthy comment was in regard to the demo "R.Strauss - Ein Heldenleben Op.40: for large symphonic orchestra"


Agreed, around 00:20 it sounds awful! I think SM should do itself a favour and remove all demos from earlier versions and ones that clearly don't sound good. It's not a good showcase of what this library can do.

I think the example posted by @muziksculp has the overtones set too high. A real bass wouldn't have that much exaggerated upper partials nor that perfectly in-tune i.e. as you go up and shorten the string the partials drift.

I've been on a campaign to try to define 'synthy' for years. I see it as two possible outcomes:

1. When transitions between notes and articulations clearly reveal they were performed on a keyboard or other controller of a different nature from the real instruments. That's why percussions and pianos rarely if ever sound 'synthy'. 

2. When the instrument portraits artificial qualities in the sound such as grainy artefacts, perfectly aligned and resonant partials, absolute perfect intonation or in the case of ensembles: artificially tight performance.

SM is completely incapable of number 1, everything sounds like it's coming from the same instrument/performance. But all SM instruments suffer from number 2, especially when very exposed. The trick is to hide it—with instruments, by lowering the dynamics or changing overtones/resonances, etc. You have to remember that the human body is incapable of keeping the exact millimetric position at any given time, thus the embouchure or bowing will always vary, consequently varying intensity, pitch, upper partials, etc. In other words, keep the instrument moving at all times and it will be almost impossible to tell it apart from the real thing.

I haven't worked much with the ensembles yet, however I already realised that I can't use the instruments as they are. I need to set it up as at least 2 desks per section, in order to have more varying performance within each group and consequently give it a more realistic feel and movement.


----------



## robgb

A friend recently said to me, "Man, that sounds really synthy." He was listening to a recording of a real chamber orchestra.


----------



## muziksculp

Bollen said:


> I think the example posted by @muziksculp has the overtones set too high. A real bass wouldn't have that much exaggerated upper partials nor that perfectly in-tune i.e. as you go up and shorten the string the partials drift.


I didn't dial up, or down the overtones parameter, I just played the stock legato patch. I can play it again, making sure the overtones parameter is set to minimum.


----------



## Bollen

muziksculp said:


> I didn't dial up, or down the overtones parameter, I just played the stock legato patch. I can play it again, making sure the overtones parameter is set to minimum.


No need, I have a real bass here at home...


----------



## justthere

Bollen said:


> I've been on a campaign to try to define 'synthy' for years. I see it as two possible outcomes:
> 
> 1. When transitions between notes and articulations clearly reveal they were performed on a keyboard or other controller of a different nature from the real instruments. That's why percussions and pianos rarely if ever sound 'synthy'.
> 
> 2. When the instrument portraits artificial qualities in the sound such as grainy artefacts, perfectly aligned and resonant partials, absolute perfect intonation or in the case of ensembles: artificially tight performance.


I love hearing someone say this. How many "synthy" comments I have read about things that are more about orchestration and non-idiomatic programming? That's what ruins so many demos for me. If I'd only listened to the demos for SWAM winds I would never have bought them. And it was only when I leaned in that SM Strings became what it is to me now. And one can add poorly implemented dynamics to #2 - when a loud sound is played softly or merely filtered; or any of the other things that come with traditional sample-playback. It is a very specific skill to be able to write with the library as the instrument, involving avoiding its inherent limitations. "Doesn't do something well? Don't write that line!" Which is an awful way to think about composing but a good way to deliver convincing product.


----------



## I like music

I'm a fan of the strings. There's just one element I struggle with, which is what happens at the lower dynamics. 

The sound becomes muffled, as if there's a veil between the listener and the instruments. Much less a problem if cc14 is low (instrument distance) but when fitting it in with most libraries, I need cc14 to be further back, exacerbating it. 

I need to experiment with using that part of the range less + using more volume automation perhaps.


----------



## Vardaro

I like music said:


> The sound becomes muffled, as if there's a veil between the listener and the instruments. Much less a problem if cc14 is low (instrument distance) but when fitting it in with most libraries, I need cc14 to be further back, exacerbating it.


But his is what happens with real strings: at low levels the timbre is less bright, and also at a distance higher frequencies disperse more than lower ones.

We can always "juggle" with dynamics vs volume.

Is SM Strings just _too_ realistic?!!


----------



## I like music

Vardaro said:


> But his is what happens with real strings: at low levels the timbre is less bright, and also at a distance higher frequencies disperse more than lower ones.
> 
> We can always "juggle" with dynamics vs volume.
> 
> Is SM Strings just _too_ realistic?!!


Perhaps I'm speaking from the vantage point of someone who has listened to too many recordings where mics (esp close) were involved and so my idea of the actual sound is skewed. 

That said, I did learn the violin a little (in fact I think you were very helpful with some advice if I remember correctly) 

The problem there was that even at the softest timbre, the damn thing was next to my ear, so I still couldn't experience the sound from "afar" 

And concert tickets cost too much!


----------



## Vardaro

I like music said:


> The problem there was that even at the softest timbre, the damn thing was next to my ear, so I still couldn't experience the sound from "afar"


I use an etymotic plug in my left ear, or a ball of cotton wool: it lessens the scratchiness, and the volume..


----------



## pierrevigneron

I use cubase. does anyone know a simple way to regularly and randomly vary several parameters, a kind of random lfo of the different cc's? in any case I find these strings perfectible but frankly what a joy to have something that reacts so well on hand and sounds overall very good. I love them !


----------



## muziksculp

pierrevigneron said:


> I use cubase. does anyone know a simple way to regularly and randomly vary several parameters, a kind of random lfo of the different cc's? in any case I find these strings perfectible but frankly what a joy to have something that reacts so well on hand and sounds overall very good. I love them !


Check this post by @Fa ,

He mentions a Melda Production plugin you might find it helpful. I think he said he is going to post more about it in a future post on that thread. 

https://vi-control.net/community/th...ps-tricks-demos-tutorials.119043/post-5078056


----------



## pierrevigneron

Thanks !


----------



## jesussaddle

muziksculp said:


> Hi,
> 
> Had a couple hours of quality time with Ver. 2.0.1 this afternoon, and I can confirm that it behaves, and sounds better than the previous versions.
> 
> I'm really enjoying the new Chamber Strings section. Very intimate, and detailed sounding. I'm planning to continue discovering this library in-depth, I haven't ventured into messing around with the Timbral-Shaping part, which I think has also been improved in version 2.0.1. I'm love working with this library, it's just so flexible, the type of strings Sculp enjoys
> 
> Actually, I'm thinking about creating a new topic thread with the title :
> 
> "Sample Modeling - Solo & Ensemble Strings : Tips, Tricks, Demos, Tutorials "
> 
> What do you think ? would you find this type of thread dedicated to this library useful, and a good resource to have on this forum ?
> 
> honestly, I find this thread too big, I personally would like a more focused resource type thread for this library, I would also invite the experts with a lot of experience using this library, and who also produce demos for SM to join in, and contribute with their knowledge, post videos, tips, tutorials, answer questions, ..etc. If that is possible. It will surely help me a lot.
> 
> Let me know if you want me to start the thread.
> 
> Cheers,
> Muziksculp


Please do.


----------



## jesussaddle

DANIELE said:


> I would reccommend the Precedence + Breeze combo too. I use ti from the beginning and you can achieve very good results at a low price and with low resurces.
> If I remember correctly with VSS2 you still have to use an external reverb plugin, pretty tricky to set.


This is exactly the tool that I turn to for modeled instruments and for piecing things together that people complain don't mix right. With Precedence and Breeze 2 I find that there really isn't much issue, unless something has an over the top wet sound. I imagine I could even mix Albion One in with some other dryer library and it would sit right inside Breeze/Precedence.


----------



## jesussaddle

justthere said:


> The two best things (to me) about SM strings are: the large number of ways that you can perform or edit notes over time, and the responsiveness and agility of the instrument. As opposed to traditional libraries, it goes where you tell it to go and does what you tell it to do, as opposed to playing a recording of an instrument or section striking a pose. These instruments ask a lot of the user - that the user understands what strings do, both individually and in ensemble, and can make those things happen - but traditional libraries have to be “played” to suit their strengths and avoid their weaknesses, which is one of the many reasons that scores are getting worse, in my opinion - that libraries often make decisions for composers or at the very least push them in a certain direction (but that’s another topic).
> 
> I understand the need of many composers to obtain a certain sonic result rapidly - having to write heavy orchestra and rock band and world instruments with a short deadline gives me great sympathy for that - but to me I still get the speed and I can write far more dynamic string parts, and it’s not difficult to get a big enough sound for what I’ve had to do with the right convolution settings. (I don’t use the built-in, though it’s very nice - I use VSS2 for placement and ER’s and Altiverb and others for size and tail.)
> 
> I used these as my main strings for my part of an animated series, and was rarely disappointed in them - they did what I asked, and so I asked a lot. The only place I ever found them a little wanting (referred to elsewhere in this thread) was when I needed to do strong staccato attacks that were larger than life, but I have things I use for that. Still - some way of adding more dig to ensembles would be extremely welcome.
> 
> A vastly under-rated thing one can do with this library and others similar to it: vary the speed of vibrato dynamically. I have this assigned to the “nod” axis of my TEControl BC2, and there’s nothing more intuitive to me than lifting my chin to speed vibrato up or lowering it to slow it down. One can think of it as conducting the instrument, or similar to what one might do when listening to a line played expressively. I have breath pressure for dynamics, bite for mod depth, and sometimes I use head tilt (side to side) for bow pressure. Those TEControl controllers are a perfect match for these instruments and those like them - especially since the bowing metaphor can’t really be reproduced by something like pressure after the fact (Roli- or Linnstrument- or GeoShred-style). I got a better result from the LEAPMotion (though it took up a hand), and imagine a better result could be obtained with a concurrent Touché or ring controller than by something with keys that respond to pressure and position - because bow movement is something that is already in progress by the time the strings are hit. The Roli and that ilk seem better for some synthesis and traditional sample playback maybe (I do use the GeoShred to control harp glissandi because it’s easy to constrain it to a scale and play it in a two-handed style and get terrific results very quickly).


Yes, a nice way to model some sort of variation right at the attack, relative to the sounding mechanism for the specific modeled instrument, would be incredible.


----------



## zigzag

jesussaddle said:


> Please do.








Sample Modeling - Solo & Ensemble Strings : Tips, Tricks, Demos, Tutorials.


Hi, Greetings Sample Modeling : Solo & Ensemble Strings users, I thought this would be a good place to post your tips, tricks, demos, videos, tutorials, questions, and other related technical details related to this library. Hopefully it will help us enjoy using this library, and harness it's...




vi-control.net


----------



## jesussaddle

robgb said:


> A friend recently said to me, "Man, that sounds really synthy." He was listening to a recording of a real chamber orchestra.


This library is very helpful and serves a great need for me right now, except I still suffer from curiosity about every other library I haven't used :D

I imagine you can add to the list of why something sounds synthy, the area of phase artifacts. People who say the real thing sounds synthy in a recording might be unused to what mixing engineers are very used to - evaluating when there is phase cancellation or unwanted phase position shifting causing wavering sense of detail, or some such (I'm not a mixing engineer by any means but I've learned to hear more than I could previously). SM chamber or ensemble instruments have a lot going on - probably not so much anything I truly understand, but more likely just lack of organic variation (maybe relative to each virtual bow's movement on each instrument. )

I've been able to get some styles and details that were evasive in my Spitefire, East West, Audio Imperia and other libs. Meanwhile, to anyone including the dev, is there a reason why FL Studio has a hard time picking up my expression controller when I re-open the same project, or load a new instance? Its getting frustrating - I have "Omni link" which means that CC#11 is set to expression controlled by my keyboard slider. I should be able to load a new instance, and move the slider. But for the past several minutes I can't get SM Strings to receive it. I don't normally wait more than a few seconds, re-fiddling the slider. But now I have 3 Kontakt instances and that could be what's causing it to take forever. "CC#11 Expression Controller is waiting for pickup" is the message I'm receiving from FL Studio all the while, as I move my slider. Yet SM is telling me "Warning, CC#11 not received yet". If I turn it off Omni then I'm afraid I will lose the CC#11 connections to the other Kontakt instruments. (That's the purpose of Omni links, to be able to switch between channel rack instruments and use controllers assigned as Omni links with the active instrument.)

[Note to dev, I found out a workaround just now. In FL to get the behavior to switch between channel racks using the same MIDI keyboard, one leaves the channel rack vst wrapper unassigned to port. When I assigned briefly to Port 0, and then back to unassigned, that connected it. Weird workaround, right? (Another reason why I'm getting more into Cubase...) ]


----------



## Syncopator

jesussaddle said:


> Please do.


I second that (e)motion.


----------



## doctoremmet

Syncopator said:


> I second that (e)motion.


The thread already exists


----------



## Syncopator

doctoremmet said:


> The thread already exists


Then, instead of simply mentioning it, it would have been helpful to point us to it.

For the benefit of others, it's here:






Sample Modeling - Solo & Ensemble Strings : Tips, Tricks, Demos, Tutorials.


Hi, Greetings Sample Modeling : Solo & Ensemble Strings users, I thought this would be a good place to post your tips, tricks, demos, videos, tutorials, questions, and other related technical details related to this library. Hopefully it will help us enjoy using this library, and harness it's...




vi-control.net


----------



## doctoremmet

Syncopator said:


> Then, instead of simply mentioning it, it would be helpful to point us to it.


Hey, I was searching - bear with me 
Just trying to help, no snark - but thanks for the friendly reminder 






Sample Modeling - Solo & Ensemble Strings : Tips, Tricks, Demos, Tutorials.


Hi, Greetings Sample Modeling : Solo & Ensemble Strings users, I thought this would be a good place to post your tips, tricks, demos, videos, tutorials, questions, and other related technical details related to this library. Hopefully it will help us enjoy using this library, and harness it's...




vi-control.net


----------



## Trash Panda

Hey y’all. The thread you’re asking for is here. HTPH!






Sample Modeling - Solo & Ensemble Strings : Tips, Tricks, Demos, Tutorials.


Hi, Greetings Sample Modeling : Solo & Ensemble Strings users, I thought this would be a good place to post your tips, tricks, demos, videos, tutorials, questions, and other related technical details related to this library. Hopefully it will help us enjoy using this library, and harness it's...




vi-control.net


----------



## pierrevigneron

Hi there. Could someone help me please? I don't understand why it doesn't work anymore. I use instant controls in cubase with my x-touch mini. The problem is that after having defined a parameter in cubase, Ensemble strings asks me to synchronize. Yet I do not make any changes from the Kontakt interface


----------



## pierrevigneron

2022-09-07 17-57-10.mkv


1 file sent via WeTransfer, the simplest way to send your files around the world




we.tl


----------



## pierrevigneron

(Dynamic CC1 is ok with my midi keyboard)


----------



## Bollen

pierrevigneron said:


> Hi there. Could someone help me please? I don't understand why it doesn't work anymore. I use instant controls in cubase with my x-touch mini. The problem is that after having defined a parameter in cubase, Ensemble strings asks me to synchronize. Yet I do not make any changes from the Kontakt interface


If all your instances are set to the same channel and you're JUST controlling via Cubase, I would just ignore the warning...


----------



## pierrevigneron

I don't understand what is happening before everything seemed to work and then I get this kind of thing (see the video in link). Thanks for your help Bollen but I have the impression that only one of the four sections is affected by my instantaneous controls from cubase.









2022-09-15 19-08-32.mkv


1 file sent via WeTransfer, the simplest way to send your files around the world




we.tl


----------



## pierrevigneron

in this video we clearly hear that my control over the vibrato rate has no effect









2022-09-15 19-14-58.mkv


1 file sent via WeTransfer, the simplest way to send your files around the world




we.tl


----------



## Bollen

pierrevigneron said:


> in this video we clearly hear that my control over the vibrato rate has no effect
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2022-09-15 19-14-58.mkv
> 
> 
> 1 file sent via WeTransfer, the simplest way to send your files around the world
> 
> 
> 
> 
> we.tl


Without looking into it further I would venture a guess and say it's because you're changing the expression CC11 to CC1. I'm not certain you can do this because you can't change that parameter in the modules, hence you would constantly get the warning i.e. you've changed a parameter in the main instruments, but the modules are not receiving the same change, thus a desynch.

I would recommend you use a multiscript instead of changing the CC on the interface.

Let me know if you need help with that.


----------



## pierrevigneron

Thanks for your feedback. If I understand correctly, the modwhell of my midi keyboard should send information C11 rather than C01 and the problem would be solved? I do not know how to do.


----------



## pierrevigneron

2022-09-19 13-00-25.mkv


1 file sent via WeTransfer, the simplest way to send your files around the world




we.tl


----------



## Bollen

pierrevigneron said:


> Thanks for your feedback. If I understand correctly, the modwhell of my midi keyboard should send information C11 rather than C01 and the problem would be solved? I do not know how to do.


The CC Remapping doesn't work on the instruments, but don't worry, what you want to achieve is quite simple:

1- In the instrument go to the multiscript tab and select an <empty>:





2.- Click on Preset > Factory > Transform and pick either Alias Control Changes (if you want to remap multiple CC) or Transformer (if you just want to remap only one).





3.- Then in Source you indicate what controller you want to use and in Alias what controller it should control:





So if you want to control Vibrato Intensity with CC40, then you set Source to 40 and Alias to 1.
Just tested it on my end and it works fine.

Hope that helps!


----------



## pierrevigneron

Thank you very much Bollen for this answer which was the starting point of an investigation which allowed me to conclude on this hypothesis: SM Ensemble and solo Strings simply do not work with Cubase's Instant Controls.

On the video that I transmit we notice that the CC automation is only carried out when I have deactivated the instantaneous control function of my X-touch mini controller and that I have reassigned my CC thanks to the "Alias" function control changes" that you explained to me.

It's really a shame because in my workflow it will be necessary every time I remember "No, remember, you have to deactivate the instantaneous controls on this track if you want to do automation with your X touch mini, because it's Sample Modeling"


----------



## pierrevigneron

2022-09-20 08-57-03.mkv


1 file sent via WeTransfer, the simplest way to send your files around the world




we.tl


----------



## pierrevigneron

In fact I correct myself: I focused on this story of message "Please synchronize together" which appears when the instant controls of cubase are activated but they seem that activated or not nothing changes except this message. What is still surprising is that when opening SM E S Cc11 cannot be activated via the instant checks function


----------



## Bollen

pierrevigneron said:


> 2022-09-20 08-57-03.mkv
> 
> 
> 1 file sent via WeTransfer, the simplest way to send your files around the world
> 
> 
> 
> 
> we.tl


No, no, no... You use the Multiscript INSTEAD of changing things in the SM UI. Don't touch the UI and apply your re-routing in the script.

Also, you can't leave all the other knobs using conflicting configurations. If you are going to change just one parameter, make sure all the assignments are the same i.e. Source to CC40 and Alias to CC1. If you leave some in CC1 routed to other CCs you're just going to make a mess.... Alternatively just use the Transformer Multiscript... And NEVER touch anything on the SM UI!


----------



## pierrevigneron

but precisely if I route my controller CC1 to CC11 using this script, the CC1 acts on C11 + CC1, or I don't want to act at the same time on the intensity and on the vibrato at the same time. I am therefore obliged to define another CC for the vibrato...


----------



## Bollen

pierrevigneron said:


> if I route my controller CC1 to CC11 using this script, the CC1 acts on C11 + CC1


Not if you configure ALL the knobs. If for example you use the *Transformer *and set it to CC1 > CC11, then NO CC1 should be entering the SM instruments. It is a filter after all. In your video you left several knobs set to CC1, therefore it is not being filtered....


----------



## pierrevigneron

Yes, I managed to get the cc changes scripts to work, but the problem arises with my configuration: I use X-touch mini in all my sessions to quickly change the parameters of each MIDI track and the sends of the audio tracks. However, when the X-touch mini is activated it seems that nothing works correctly with SMSE, even through the scripts and when I deactivate the instant controllers of cubase the changes still take place in Kontakt. The only possibility is then to permanently deactivate them from the MIDI remote wizard. So it's very laborious I can't afford to deactivate everything when I want to use SMSE correctly then reassign all my instantaneous controllers to switch to other tracks.


----------



## pierrevigneron

2022-09-23 11-39-27b.mkv


1 file sent via WeTransfer, the simplest way to send your files around the world




we.tl


----------



## Bollen

pierrevigneron said:


> 2022-09-23 11-39-27b.mkv
> 
> 
> 1 file sent via WeTransfer, the simplest way to send your files around the world
> 
> 
> 
> 
> we.tl


OK, I've never used Instant Controllers so I'll have to have a look...

I'll get back to you.


----------



## pierrevigneron

Thank you Bollen !


----------



## Bollen

pierrevigneron said:


> Thank you Bollen !


OK, after much research it appears it is not possible. Quick Controls can only be used as Host Automation. However, not all is lost! Since your controller is transmitting MIDI CC, you can simply turn Quick Controls OFF when using SM and then use the Multiscript trick above to assign everything to your taste. It's still quicker than using other systems.
Alternatively you could contact the developers of SM and ask them to enable Host Automation, but considering how old their script is I wouldn't count on it...


----------



## pierrevigneron

Merci !


----------



## Lord Daknight

Hey guys how good are the Harmonics in SM strings? I've been looking for a string library that has Legato and portamento for harmonics but and I'm guessing this has that


----------



## sctaylorcan

philippe goi said:


> Hello! Here is my MidiPaw setting.
> Yes really musical with a little training , here is also an improv with MidiPaw with the solo violin , interpretation in real time .


So here's an 18-month bounce, @philippe goi -- You are a true genius with playing SampleModeling with midipaw - I still can't get it to sound as wonderful as your playing in that demo    Well done!! 






Samplemodeling Solo & Ensemble Strings Released


Small improv with the solo violin and MidiPaw , fantastic sensations with a lot of expressiveness!




vi-control.net


----------



## Fa

Lord Daknight said:


> Hey guys how good are the Harmonics in SM strings? I've been looking for a string library that has Legato and portamento for harmonics but and I'm guessing this has that


Yes, actually it has the same play-control functions for all sustain articulations, then legato and portamento work on harmonics as well.


----------



## Lord Daknight

Fa said:


> Yes, actually it has the same play-control functions for all sustain articulations, then legato and portamento work on harmonics as well.


Ok, can you send me an audio example of how it sounds? I can't seem to find any on YouTube


----------



## Bruhelius

Hi everyone,

I am working in Reaper, and am looking for a way to make SM strings articulations work only via MIDI CC messages. I am drawing a blank, but is there perhaps an easy way to do this? Should I be using a Reaticulate instance for this, or can SM strings be internally configured within Kontakt to accept MIDI CC instead of keyswitches? Thanks!


----------



## Bollen

Bruhelius said:


> Hi everyone,
> 
> I am working in Reaper, and am looking for a way to make SM strings articulations work only via MIDI CC messages. I am drawing a blank, but is there perhaps an easy way to do this? Should I be using a Reaticulate instance for this, or can SM strings be internally configured within Kontakt to accept MIDI CC instead of keyswitches? Thanks!


Technically you could use a Multiscript converter to do this, I think it's called CCs to Notes.


----------



## Don Cajon

Why is there a version 2.0.3 of the solo strings available for purchase and not for owners of the ensemble, chamber and solo strings? https://www.samplemodeling.com/products/solostrings

Any reason there was no email about this?


----------



## gamma-ut

Don Cajon said:


> Why is there a version 2.0.3 of the solo strings available for purchase and not for owners of the ensemble, chamber and solo strings? https://www.samplemodeling.com/products/solostrings
> 
> Any reason there was no email about this?


It looks as though they're adding NKS looking at the solo strings. Maybe they just haven't completed the whole set and are waiting to do that?

If you're waiting on the NKS, maybe send an email and ask for the updated files. SM has a slightly weird update system where you go through the shop, so I expect they don't want to put that up until it's all ready.


----------



## Cristian Labelli

Hi all 

On the occasion of the release of *Solo instruments v2.03* as individual items (Violin, Viola, Cello & Double Bass) as well as of *Solo Strings Bundle v2.03*, I'm preparing some new demos that exploit the instruments to the fullest. 

This is one of them:



Any feedback/comments are greatly appreciated! 
Cristian


----------



## Don Cajon

Received the newsletter about the solo strings being available separately, but nothing about what happens with v2.0.3 owners of the current Ensemble, Chamber and Solo Strings.



> If you're waiting on the NKS, maybe send an email and ask for the updated files. SM has a slightly weird update system where you go through the shop, so I expect they don't want to put that up until it's all ready.


Yeah, I already mailed them but thought someone here might already know more about this.


----------

