# DVZ® Strings at Composer Expo



## Frederick Russ (Sep 24, 2008)

Press Release:







http://www.music4games.net/News_Display.aspx?id=1062

Audio Impressions' will be demonstrating DVZ® Strings at the Composer Expo in Los Angeles.

Audio Impressions' DVZ® Strings is made up of 70 virtual string players; 18 Violins I, 16 Violins II, 14 Violas, 12 Celli and 10 Basses of which there are 10 soloist and it contains samples of priceless Stradivari and Guarneri instruments that were recorded in London's finest studios.

Ai's DVZ patented technology relies upon having separate samples with multiple bowing positions for each and every string on each instrument. This approach allows for full control over the virtual orchestra and preserves real-world note distribution and sound-power balances so you're not hearing twice as many sampled musicians when two notes are being played, and then three times as many when three notes are played, with DVZ technology a constant ‘musician count' is always automatically being maintained. This technique also allows for accurately increasing or decreasing the number of total virtual musician count desk-by-desk in real-time for real-world section balances and for more accurate score transcription capabilities.

Included with DVZ Strings is Audio Impressions' SPACE process which provides multiple Decca Tree array presets, continuously variable spot mic balances, and multiple user-adjustable room size characteristics to faithfully simulate the mic-bleed that naturally occurs in orchestral recordings on sound stages.

Audio Impressions' sample libraries and technologies are ideal for composers who use computers for creating film, TV, and videogame scores, live theater productions and for music education.

For more information: 
www.audioimpressions.com
http://www.composerexpo.com/


----------



## Ed (Sep 24, 2008)

Weird, why is Fredrick posting this press release and why is it the exact same thing we've been hearing for years (or at least, it feels like it)?


----------



## lee (Sep 24, 2008)

Because he´s the secret DVZ boss.


----------



## Pzy-Clone (Sep 24, 2008)

well, i poked around their website..and it seems to me they have much more info there now, and i got the impression they are gonna be selling the lib without the hardware ? 
lets see, i dunno..i think this is quite kewl, possibly.
Did you see that long long list of sampled brass\woodwinds? geez....
Are u kiddin???? how big is this s`possd to be realy...?

A Clarinet
Alto Flute 1
Alto Flute 2
Alto Flute 3
Alto Flute 4
Alto Recorder
Alto Sax 1
Alto Sax 2
Alto Tarka Flute 1
American Nose Flute
Armenian Duduk
Bagpipe
Bamboo Flute
Bamboo Flute Hi
Bansuri
Baroque Flute
Bass Clarinet 1
Bass Clarinet 2
Bass Flute 1
Bass Flute 2
Bass Harmonica
Bass Oboe 1
Bass Oboe 2
Bass Sax 1
Bass Tarka Flute 1
Bass Tarka Flute 2
Basset Horn 1
Basset Shawm 1
Basset Shawm 2
Bb Contrabass Clarinet 1
Bina
Blues Harmonica
Bombard
C Clarinet 1
Carretto Wood Quena
Cherokee Flute
Chinese Flute
Chinese Xiao
Chromatic Harmonica
Clarke Pennywhistle
Contrabass Bassoon 1
Contrabass Bassoon 2
Contrabass Flute 1
Contrabass Flute 2
Contrabass Sax 1
Cornamuse
Crumhorn 1
Crumhorn 2
Crystal Piccolo 1
Crystal Piccolo 2
Curtal 1
Curtal 2
Descant Recorder Didgeridoo 1
Didgeridoo 2
Didgeridoo 3
Didgeridoo 4
Double Hijwiz
Eb Clarinet 1
Eb Contrabass Clarinet 1
Eb Contrabass Clarinet 2
Egyptian Ney
Fife 1
Fife 2
Fife 3
Fife 4
Gemshorn
Great Bass Rackett
Heckelphone 1
Indian Shenai
Irish Folk Flute
Jogi Baja
Kaen
Kazoo Ensemble
Kazoo Solo
Large Penny Whistle
Lizard
Low Nepali Flute
Meg Whistle
Mijwiz
Mizmar
Mizmar Small
Morroccan Raita
Moseno
Native American Bass Flute 1
Native American Bass Flute 2
Native American Soprano Flute
Native American Turkey Bone 1
Native American Turkey Bone 2
Oboe Cor Anglais 1
Oboe Cor Anglais 2
Oboe D'Amore 1
Oboe D'Amore 2
Ocarina
Ocarina Melodiosa
Ocarina Round
Ocarina Toucan
Ocarina Toucan
Owel
Peruvian Bamboo Flute
Piano Flute
Piccolo 1
Piccolo 2
Piccolo 3
Piccolo 4
Piccolo Oboe
Pocket (Bamboo) Clarinet
Pommer 1
Pommer 2
Punji Snake Charmer Pipe
Rackett
Sarrusophone 1
Sarrusophone 2
Shakuhachi 1
Shakuhachi 2
Shawm
Sheng
Shofar
Siku Pan Pipes
Single Chanter
Single Mefred Mijwiz
Sizevari
Small Zurna
Sop. Tarka Flute 1
Sop. Tarka Flute 2
Sopranino Recorder
Sopranino Sax 1
Soprano Sax 1
Soprano Treble Pipes
Spirit Double Flute
Suona
Susato Kildare
Susato Kildare Piccolo
Susato Tabor
Swanee Slide Whistle
Tenor Recorder
Tenor Sax 1
Tenor Tarka Flute
Traditional Fife
Treble Pipes
Treble Recorder 1
Treble Recorder 2
Turkish Mey
Whistling Hiking Stick
Zurna

Alto Trombone 1 (Eb)
Alto Trombone 2 (Eb)
Alpen Horn 1
Alpen Horn 2
Alpen Horn 3
Alpen Horn 4
Bass Trombone 1
Bass Trombone 2
Bass Trumpet 1
Bass Trumpet 2
Brass French Horn 1
Brass French Horn 2
Brass French Horn 3
Brass French Horn 4
Brass French Horn 5
Brass French Horn 6
Brass French Horn 7
Brass French Horn 8
Chimbasso 1
Chimbasso 2
Contrabass Trombone 1
Contrabass Trombone 2
Cornet 1
Cornet 2
Cornetto 1
Cornetto 2
Euphonium 1
Euphonium 2
Flugelhorn 1
Flugelhorn 2
Herold Trumpet 1
Herold Trumpet 2
Herold Trumpet 3
Herold Trumpet 4
Jazz Bass Trombone 1
Jazz Bass Trombone 2
Jazz Clarinet
Jazz Flute
Jazz Sax Alto 1
Jazz Sax Alto 2
Jazz Sax Tenor 1
Jazz Sax Baritone
Jazz Sax Bass
Jazz Sax Sopprano
Jazz Sax Tenor 2
Jazz Trombone 1
Jazz Trombone 2
Jazz Trombone 3
Jazz Trombone 4
Jazz Trumpet 1
Jazz Trumpet 2
Jazz Trumpet 3
Jazz Trumpet 4
Natural Horn 1
Natural Horn 2
Natural Trumpet 1
Natural Trumpet 2
Nickel French Horn 1
Nickel French Horn 2
Nickel French Horn 3
Nickel French Horn 4
Nickel French Horn 5
Nickel French Horn 6
Nickel French Horn 7
Nickel French Horn 8
Ophecleide 1
Ophecleide 2
Peck Horn 1 (Eb)
Peck Horn 2 (Eb)
Piccolo Trumpet 1 (Bb)
Piccolo Trumpet 1 (Eb)
Piccolo Trumpet 2 (Bb)
Piccolo Trumpet 2 (Eb)
Sackbut 1
Sackbut 2
Serpent 1
Serpent 2
Slide Trumpet 1*
Slide Trumpet 2*
Tenor Horn 1
Tenor Horn 2
Tenor Horn 3
Tenor Horn 4
Tenor Trombone 1
Tenor Trombone 2
Tenor Trombone 3
Tenor Trombone 4
Tenor Valve Trombone 1
Tenor Valve Trombone 2
Tenor Valve Trombone 3
Tenor Valve Trombone 4
Tibetan Horn 1
Tibetan Horn 2
Trumpet 1 (Bb)
Trumpet 2 (Bb)
Trumpet 3 (Bb)
Trumpet 4 (Bb)
Tuba 1 (Bb)
Tuba 1 (C)
Tuba 1 (D)
Tuba 1 (Eb)
Tuba 1 (F)
Tuba 2 (Bb)
Tuba 2 (C)
Tuba 2 (D)
Tuba 2 (Eb)
Tuba 2 (F)
Tubax
Tuben Alto 1
Tuben Alto 2
Tuben Alto 3
Tuben Alto 4
Tuben Tenor 1
Tuben Tenor 2
Tuben Tenor 3
Tuben Tenor 4
Weiner Horn 1
Weiner Horn 2
Weiner Horn 3
Weiner Horn 4

* Also known as Soprano Trombone


----------



## Ed (Sep 24, 2008)

I'd rather they sampled a 1/10th of that and have it sound really good.


----------



## Pietro (Sep 24, 2008)

Don't like the demos, but I love the box .

- Piotr


----------



## Pzy-Clone (Sep 24, 2008)

there are demos?


----------



## Pietro (Sep 24, 2008)

_"Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum."_

Lorem ipsum indeed :mrgreen:

There used to be a strings demo, I was referring to that one.

- Piotr


----------



## Pzy-Clone (Sep 24, 2008)

yeah yeah, that was a million years ago, i heard that one as well.

but most of all, im looking forward to the 
"Whistling Hiking Stick"

Thats gonna be the make or break instrument for me.


----------



## Ed (Sep 24, 2008)

Pzy-Clone @ Wed Sep 24 said:


> yeah yeah, that was a million years ago, i heard that one as well.



Really think it will be that much better? Not saying it wont be, I just dont hold out much hope now. Of course, I'll never be able to afford it anyway! And even if I could, I wouldnt want all that gear just to use it!


----------



## IvanP (Sep 24, 2008)

I'm sure the chums at AI have been working as mads since their 1st demos...

Let's give the guys a chance and have an opinion after listening to something new 0oD


----------



## Pzy-Clone (Sep 24, 2008)

yes, i actualy think this will turn out to be a good library with innovative solutions.

i mean most of the VSl demos sound like poo, but no one is claiming that its a crappy library for that reason. 

1 rough string demo says nothing. 

I just simply refuse to think that something so ambitious and OTT will sound like BS.


----------



## Ed (Sep 24, 2008)

Pzy-Clone @ Wed Sep 24 said:


> yes, i actualy think this will turn out to be a good library with innovative solutions.
> 
> i mean most of the VSl demos sound like poo, but no one is claiming that its a crappy library for that reason.
> 
> ...



Im not basing this on just one demo, but also on the live demos. Also, people that I respect like Nick and Craig that have seen it seem to only have good things to say about the *technology*. Thats not a good sign.


----------



## Pzy-Clone (Sep 24, 2008)

yeah, fair enuff, but still...out of those 2 million instruments sampled, they atleast must have gotten a few of them right?
Im hoping for one of them being the 
"Whistling Hiking Stick" 

Ok, so maybe the strings sound a bit off. But then again, THAT complaint is as old as sampling itself, or even older. like, realy waaayy old. a long time. eons.


And..besides, we are treating other libs in a whole manner of weird and abusive ways in order for them to sound ok, so why should this be any different?

so lets see where it goes. 
it cant be anything else then good to have more variation and more to choose from, right?

or perhaps, as someone said :
"I DON'T WANT MORE CHOICE, I JUST WANT NICER THINGS" lol


----------



## Ed (Sep 24, 2008)

[begin rant]




Pzy-Clone @ Wed Sep 24 said:


> yeah, fair enuff, but still...out of those 2 million instruments sampled, they atleast must have gotten a few of them right?
> Im hoping for one of them being the
> "Whistling Hiking Stick"



lol. Well thats also a red flag for me.  They've already said they didnt deeply sample the instruments like VSL, so that means it must be controlled by some kind of scripting engine. You cant have one script for all instruments, they will all need to be individually tweaked. Assuming its even possible to make it sound great that way, can you imagine how much time that would have to take? They obviously didnt take any time to do that as they would be working on it for the next 10 years. At the end of the day having tried to sample, it seems, every instrument known to man means it will be at the expense of detail. I could be wrong, but all of it points to this being bad as far as Im concerned. 



> Ok, so maybe the strings sound a bit off. But then again, THAT complaint is as old as sampling itself, or even older. like, realy waaayy old. a long time. eons.



For the amount of money they are charging they shouldnt be "a bit off". For the amount of gear you need and the fact that you need to base your entire production around this system it shouldnt be "a bit off". For a company that compares it self to Synclavier and the most expensive cars it shouldnt be "a bit off". When they claim they recorded in such a great location, with such great players it shouldnt be "a bit off". And I also think "a bit off", based on what we've heard, is being rather kind. 



> And..besides, we are treating other libs in a whole manner of weird and abusive ways in order for them to sound ok, so why should this be any different?



Because we shouldnt need to! VSLs approach claimed you need to record in their silent stage in order to offer their performace tools and this has been proved to be wrong, you dont need it to be dry. We're "treating" their library because they made a mistake. Some people say they like the dryness because it gives them "more control", but thats where it ends and most people would rather it be wetter. You shouldnt have to do ridiculous amounts of EQing, really you shouldnt have to EQ at all! You shouldnt have to add early reflections to it to make it sound like its in a studio AND then go and have to add your reverb. I dont see many people saying doing that actually is preferable to VSL recording in a nice studio in the first place and definitely dont see people saying it sounds the same.

VSL compromised sound quality so they could have their performance tools. They were wrong, but at least they felt they had a good reason at the time and at least theres some great samples in their library anyway. THIS library is (and will) be (I estimate) about 20 times the price and needs ridiculous amounts of hardware to run. For all that this is claimed to be, I dont expect to have to go to extraordinary lengths to get stuff sounding good, layering of sample, layerings of reverbs, etc etc. And when ProjectSAM comes out with such beautiful sounding library I just think why do other library producers get things wrong so often? They demoed this thing live and they gave us a demo on their website and some of us still make excuses for them, yet someone can play a few notes in Symphobia and we all cream our pants OOhing and Ahhing over how great it sounds? Come on! :D 



> so lets see where it goes.
> it cant be anything else then good to have more variation and more to choose from, right?



Not at their asking price!!! >8o    




[end rant] o-[][]-o


----------



## Peter Alexander (Sep 24, 2008)

My understanding from talking to one of their dealers is that the price of the strings software alone is $3500, and two computers are needed plus Kontakt 3, FX Teleport and Audio Mulch. So you're looking at about $8000 to $8500.


----------



## Frederick Russ (Sep 24, 2008)

lee @ Wed Sep 24 said:


> Because he´s the secret DVZ boss.



Nope. Just got it in an email - since it was pertinent to discussion here it was a neutral decision to post the press release.


----------



## Robobino (Sep 24, 2008)

What a big mess!... Why don't they just edit the whole damn thing in standard Kontak 3 format, with good scripting, and sell it at a reasonable price?... Composers with money will go for a real orchestra anyway, they won't waste their time with a so-so library that sells the price of a space shuttle...


----------



## lux (Sep 24, 2008)

IvanP @ Wed Sep 24 said:


> I'm sure the chums at AI have been working as mads since their 1st demos...
> 
> Let's give the guys a chance and have an opinion after listening to something new 0oD



exactly.


----------



## Pzy-Clone (Sep 25, 2008)

oh come on you peoples. 
lets be a bit upbeat and positive towards things, its not like anyone is forcing this down yer ol throat.

And the comment that VSL compromised sound quality, is ridiculus.
VSL are by far the best recorded and most detailed library out there, just becouse certain people dont know how to use a simple eq for them dont mean they are not good.

I wonder, when did it become a valid school of though that one shouldnt "have" to eq and process your music? WOW, i must have been wrong all along myself as well, along with VSl offcourse.

And im not even a proper VSL user, i just find that sentence realy banal.

And as far as AI goes..well, we shall indeed see what becomes of it.

Dont feel so strongly about it, its just some samples., and aint worth gettin a heart attack over.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Sep 25, 2008)

5 piccolos? FINALLY!! =o :lol:

Oh, and I see that I can finallly write that didgeridoo quartet I've been thinking about.

But, why, why, oh why only one tubax? :cry:


----------



## Pzy-Clone (Sep 25, 2008)

Awww, dont fret, at least they have a 
"Kazoo Ensemble" :D


----------



## Ed (Sep 25, 2008)

Pzy-Clone @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> And the comment that VSL compromised sound quality, is ridiculus.
> VSL are by far the best recorded and most detailed library out there,



It is the most *detailed*, but it certianly isnt the best recorded. This is proven by sounds that, well, sound better! If something is very detailed doesnt necessarily mean it has a very good sound as well. 




> just becouse certain people dont know how to use a simple eq for them dont mean they are not good.
> 
> I wonder, when did it become a valid school of though that one shouldnt "have" to eq and process your music? WOW, i must have been wrong all along myself as well, along with VSl offcourse.



Its not just EQ I talked about, remember? But on the topic of EQ, remember when SVK posted his Appassionata strings tracks and posted all his detailed EQ settings because, you see, the strings contain all these nasty resonances that needed to be taken care of. This is only necessary because their recording techniques produce these unpleasent resonances. Its the reason why most of us dislike their original strings library. No amount of EQing and reverb placement will make them sound amazing. Record in a nice studio and drastic amounts of EQing just doesnt need to be done, if at all. Why dont you ask the PP guys, who people gush all over the sound of their library how much EQing they need to do to their sounds just to make it sound nice. I expect you already know the answer! At the end of the day, the better you record it the less you need to process it. 



> Dont feel so strongly about it, its just some samples., and aint worth gettin a heart attack over.



Im not, I just felt like having a rant. /\~O


----------



## lux (Sep 25, 2008)

Ed @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> Pzy-Clone @ Thu Sep 25 said:
> 
> 
> > And the comment that VSL compromised sound quality, is ridiculus.
> ...



This is an interesting sentence. Actually i'm not able to define what has in absolute a "very good sound". 

Sound for what? I think you cant discuss how good Vsl is sampled. My opinion is that lot of skilled people work to the recording and programming of those sounds. They made a choice, of course. I'm among those who rarely use Vsl for filmscore related works, because i like instruments recorded in place with some hints of the ambience they were recorded in. But thats not the rule. I use Vsl every time i'm on pop or the like with pretty satisfying results. Also different samples have different results depending on the orchestral asset youre about to replicate.

But there's lot of effort and skills in Vsl, Ewqlso, SI, Siedlaczek and a lot more and the sound is in general good, in terms of audio reprise and mixing. The potential of usage is another story.

Luca


----------



## Ed (Sep 25, 2008)

Lux are you suggesting that the Silent stage sounds better that EW studios (or similar)? 

Lets just compare VSLs jazz instruments to BBB. Recorded with multiple mics with all the same performance stuff that VSL claimed or at least implied was impossible unless you record it totally dry. The silent stage compromised on a _great sounding room_ so they could give you the performance aspects to their library. Otherwise, theres no reason to do what they did.


----------



## Pzy-Clone (Sep 25, 2008)

lux @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> Ed @ Thu Sep 25 said:
> 
> 
> > Pzy-Clone @ Thu Sep 25 said:
> ...



true, but i think its very possible to say that the quality of a recording is not the same as its erea of usage or sonic character.
VSL IS very well recorded, better then most libraries IMO.
But they do sound rather drab and lifeless on their own, and not at all big and lush, wich i think is what Ed is trying to convey.

But realy...whetver they suit your tastes or not, i think its somewhat silly to claim something like "VSl were Wrong".

And apparently...Audio Impressions are wrong as well, and thats even without having released a single sound! wow, thats some achievement right there...:D


----------



## Ed (Sep 25, 2008)

Pzy-Clone @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> But they do sound rather drab and lifeless on their own, and not at all big and lush, wich i think is what Ed is trying to convey.



Well its easy to make them sound drab and lifeless because we're used to hearing an orchestra sound a certian way, and you dont record orchestral instruments the way they did. They need a room to breath and since the room didnt allow that, it affected the samples they got. Obviously it seems to have had less of a detrimental affect on some instruments compared to others, which is kind of interesting. 



> But realy...whetver they suit your tastes or not, i think its somewhat silly to claim somethng like "VSl were Wrong".


How else can you put it? You dont need a silent stage or even dry samples in order to offer any of their performance ideas. But, that is why they built the silent stage, based on the theory that you did.

Ed


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Sep 25, 2008)

As a very new user of VSL (I have the Chamber strings), I have to agree that I've had to EQ harmonics out of certain notes that were very annoying, as they stick out every time those specific notes are heard.


----------



## Ed (Sep 25, 2008)

Thankyou! Some agreement! I knew it wasnt just me :D :D :D


----------



## Niah (Sep 25, 2008)

Well I certainly I am not a big enthusiast of VSL's vision or approach to sampling.

I don't think that it's a question of being right or wrong I am just not au pair with their methods.

Which is a tragedy for a lack of a better word since they are one of the few companies that dedicate soly to orchestral sampling and yes they do offer us some of the most detailed collections in the market. So having that with a great sound would be a dream to me.

Of course, what is a great sound? It seems to be something pretty subjective to everyone, or is it?

I think we all can agree that Symphobia has the best collection of orchestral samples sound-wise. So far I have heard criticisms about symphobia but not one complaing about the sound. So maybe it's not that subjective. 

The silent stage removes alot of character and musicality to the instruments in my opinion. You can sure improve them with EQ and reverb but that's just about it. I believe IRCAM solo instruments set is a great example of how solo instruments should be captured and how soulful they are, a shame really that the performance capabilities are so slim.

I suspect that VSL's compromise of sound is partly because of their performance capabilities and that symphobia's lack of performance capabilities is a result of their sound approach. 
I am not saying that it's the only factor but...

It certainly seems to be the case of DVZ, (although I am holding final judgement until the next official demos). Meaning that DVZ seems like a spectacular technology which offers great possibilities but at the expense of sound.


----------



## Ashermusic (Sep 25, 2008)

Oh, brother!

1. "Good recorded sound" is entirely a subjective manner and not a new topic. People used to argue endlessly whether Ormandy and Philly were better recorded than Szell and Cleveland. It is silly. I you like it, you like it.

2. Chris Stone knows what an orchestra sounds like. He is choosing to release an expensive, computer demanding, high end product, with technology tha tis intended to speed up workflow for busy, working composers, not hobbyists, posers, and wannabes. At the end of the day, my guess is that it will be quite good. Better or worse sounding than VSL, EW, etc. will be an entirely subjective assessment.

3. Finally, NONE OF THEM SOUND LIKE THE REAL THING! GET OVER IT, FOLKS!


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Sep 25, 2008)

Hey Jay, no need to SHOUT.

The posts here do not reflect people's frustration in the samples not being 'real' enough. That's another discussion you might want to follow by searching the archives.

It's about whether they sound 'good', and while that is very subjective, I think we can all agree that virtual instruments with harmonics that pop out mechanically (meaning that they repeat, as opposed to normal human glitches that are one-time, and can be corrected with a re-recording of the line) when you play a run, or samples that are so dry that you feel like your ear is 4 inches from the instrument are not 'good'.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Sep 25, 2008)

Ashermusic @ 25/9/2008 said:


> ... not hobbyists, posers, and wannabes.



Looks like you've just made yourself a whole bunch of new friends...

PS: Poseur is spelled with a u.


----------



## Ashermusic (Sep 25, 2008)

Ned Bouhalassa @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> Ashermusic @ 25/9/2008 said:
> 
> 
> > ... not hobbyists, posers, and wannabes.
> ...



I am sorry, I did not mean to imply that folks participating in this discussion here were any of the above.

Although, if the shoe fits....


----------



## Ed (Sep 25, 2008)

Ashermusic @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> Oh, brother!
> 
> 1. "Good recorded sound" is entirely a subjective manner and not a new topic. People used to argue endlessly whether Ormandy and Philly were better recorded than Szell and Cleveland. It is silly. I you like it, you like it.



Its entirely subjective? So recording in Abbey Roads studio ala Star Wars is just as good as recording in VSLs silent stage, its all subjective right? Of course not. Everyone agrees that the sound of Star Wars is amazing. When we talk about great strings we talk about those kinds of sounds. We talk about Thomas Newman strings, recorded again, in a lovelly studio. No one says "wow VSL really captured a warm string section", or "GPO has the best sounding orchestra Ive ever heard!!", and yet you would, if good recorded sound was "entirely subjective"



> 2. Chris Stone knows what an orchestra sounds like. He is choosing to release an expensive, computer demanding, high end product, with technology tha tis intended to speed up workflow for busy, working composers, not hobbyists, posers, and wannabes. .



Whats this "_not hobbyists, posers, and wannabes_"? The only good thing seems to be the divisi technology, which sounds like a great idea, and yet entirly pointless if your mockup still sounds like poo because your sounds are dreadfull. And as for speeding up your work, if I need to spend ages tryng to get it sounding good I might as well have just used something better in the first place. 

If Chris Stone knows what a great sounding orchestra sounds like I expect to hear a great sound. I dont hear that. You can open up Symphobia, bash out a few notes and play a few chords and people go gah gah over it. AI have had several live _official _demos and people all hated the sound, they even had a demo on their website, again people hated the sound. How could that be, if what you're saying is true?

My problems with AI would still be problems even if it was a tenth of the cost, but as they are charging the price of a small house for this thing you kind of expect it to be better. 



> 3. Finally, NONE OF THEM SOUND LIKE THE REAL THING! GET OVER IT, FOLKS!



And yet some sound better than others. Strange, that?


----------



## Ashermusic (Sep 25, 2008)

Ned Bouhalassa @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> Hey Jay, no need to SHOUT.
> 
> The posts here do not reflect people's frustration in the samples not being 'real' enough. That's another discussion you might want to follow by searching the archives.
> 
> It's about whether they sound 'good', and while that is very subjective, I think we can all agree that virtual instruments with harmonics that pop out mechanically (meaning that they repeat, as opposed to normal human glitches that are one-time, and can be corrected with a re-recording of the line) when you play a run, or samples that are so dry that you feel like your ear is 4 inches from the instrument are not 'good'.



Well, a sample only sounds good or bad depending on how it is used, just like a real instrument. By and large, the prevailing assessments of sample libraries are largely determined by one guy reading that it is good/bad on the net, and another reposting it, and another reposting, it, and another reposting it. VSL, for example, is IMHO, neither as great as its supporters claim nor as bad as it detractors claim. And Ned, most folks here DO seem to equate "good sounding"with "sounds like the real thing."

I have heard what I consider good sounding work done with all of them and what I consider bad sounding work done with all of them.

Sorry for shouting.

In summation, if you cannot make good sounding music with what presently exists, you will not be able to with newer libraries. If you can, then why are you fretting about this?


----------



## Craig Sharmat (Sep 25, 2008)

> ="
> 
> Im not basing this on just one demo, but also on the live demos. Also, people that I respect like Nick and Craig that have seen it seem to only have good things to say about the *technology*. Thats not a good sign.



I don't want to speak for Nick here but my current thoughts are a product that forces me to buy a bunch of new computers is not a technology I am anxious to embrace. What I heard of AI sounds like a library that could work but I would need to get my hands on it to do the kind of tweaking I am comfortable with. I will never have the keyboard chops of Chris Stone and even if I did I would still need to tweak the demos to get them at a level I would be happy with.

As far as Asher's comment on who the library is directed at i can assure you they would love to sell all types of composers, pro or novices. The technology forces them to sell to pros at its current level but if the library could be sold to the masses they would do it. One day it might be a great solution as next generation computers make it a more viable choice.


----------



## Ashermusic (Sep 25, 2008)

Craig Sharmat @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> > ="
> >
> > Im not basing this on just one demo, but also on the live demos. Also, people that I respect like Nick and Craig that have seen it seem to only have good things to say about the *technology*. Thats not a good sign.
> 
> ...



Agreed.


----------



## choc0thrax (Sep 25, 2008)

I agree that everything is subjective. The Dark Knight has made almost 1 billion at the box office while The Rocker has made only 6 million, I believe this has nothing to do with one film being better than the other but rather the alignment of the planets when these films were released. 

As for the lack of Ai demos these days I believe they are suspending demo production because of the current economic crisis in the states, which shows a lot of heart. You don't see Symphobia doing that.


----------



## Pzy-Clone (Sep 25, 2008)

But, at the end of the day you will be judged by the quality of your work, not the raw sound of your samples.
So maybe vsl or sympho or even DVZ will do it for you, or a combo of many things.

I happen to think Symphobia is not the be-all-end-all of sampling, sure its sounds good, but its just one take on it, why such a singular approach and taste?
Does everything has to sound the same in order to be percieved as "good" these days? Streamlined, glossy and nice and pretty?

i dunno, people here seem awfully closeminded and narrow in their perception of "good" and "bad"...


----------



## Ashermusic (Sep 25, 2008)

Ed @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> Ashermusic @ Thu Sep 25 said:
> 
> 
> > Oh, brother!
> ...



Ed, your arguments only hold up if:

1. Everyone agrees that something sounds good, and there is no library, orchestra, recording, film, that that is true of.

2. You are the ultimate arbiter of what is good sound or bad. Which for yourself, of course, you are. And for me, of course, you are not.

And the differences between sample libraries is nowhere near as great as the difference between an 80 + member orchestra and any sample library, so tht comparison is not valid.

I have been sitting here for the last few minutes trying to figure out why I got involved in this discussion and I think it comes down to this:

1. I worked for Chris several years ago and grew to respect him. I know that he has poured tons of time and money into this and I am rooting for him to succeed, even though, frankly, it is not a product I personally am that interested in.

2. I rely primarily on a library that is not well thought of here. I just finished a project that made extensive use of it and my client told me that my writing and the way the music sounded was great and really moved him. And yet, were I to post any of them here, I am reasonably sure that I would get a lot of comments about how it didn't sound "real", this was sonically wrong, that is sonically wrong, etc. and that disconnect is why I think so many member of this forum spend too much time worrying about the wrong things.

Once again, I mean no disrespect to anyone here, although I reserve the right to disrespect their conclusions.


----------



## Ed (Sep 25, 2008)

Ash, you didnt answer my questions.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Sep 25, 2008)

Jay, 

When I'm in the middle of a work crunch, writing a dense cue, the last thing I want to do is EQ out some very obvious harmonics out of an instrument that are making a given line difficult to blend with other instruments. This waste of time is not 'good'. I'm not referring to scrapes, breaths, etc. Just glitches that have pitched elements that add harmonic dissonance when not needed/wanted.

I'm not advocating, btw, that the programmer should EQ out the unwanted parts, just re-record those notes.


----------



## Ashermusic (Sep 25, 2008)

Ed @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> Ash, you didnt answer my questions.



Sure I did,

1. There is nothing that EVERYONE agrees is good.

2. The differences between sample libraries is small compared to the difference between a real orchestra and any sample library.

3. Anyone's assessment of whether Chris sounds, or anyone else's sound "like poo" are just that, your assessment and only valid for yourself or someone who gives your opinion that credibility.

If I like a library or libraries and write well with it/them to the point where me and my clients are happy, then I do not need validation for the library from folks on a forum, no matter how much I may respect them.

OK, I am done. The marketplace will ultimately decide how well Audio Impressions accomplishes what it ha set out to do.


----------



## Christian Marcussen (Sep 25, 2008)

Ed @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> Lux are you suggesting that the Silent stage sounds better that EW studios (or similar)?



I'm not Lux. But to be VSL+AltiVerb sounds better (or closer to what I want) than EW Studios... Yes.


----------



## Ashermusic (Sep 25, 2008)

Ned Bouhalassa @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> Jay,
> 
> When I'm in the middle of a work crunch, writing a dense cue, the last thing I want to do is EQ out some very obvious harmonics out of an instrument that are making a given line difficult to blend with other instruments. This waste of time is not 'good'. I'm not referring to scrapes, breaths, etc. Just glitches that have pitched elements that add harmonic dissonance when not needed/wanted.
> 
> I'm not advocating, btw, that the programmer should EQ out the unwanted parts, just re-record those notes.



I totally agree Ned. But what you may perceive as a difficulty in making it blend may be specific to your taste, your writing, or the mix. Real players also sometimes have "very obvious harmonics" that composers/mixers have to deal with.

But this is why we choose the libraries we do or hire the players we hire. It is a very personal choice.

Once agin, only 2 things matter:

1.Do I like the end result and could I get the work done in a time frame I am happy with?

2. Did the client like it?

And now, I really am done.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Sep 25, 2008)

Jay,

It's not so much a difficulty as it is a p.i.t.a. when you'd rather be composing.

PS: that's 3 things in your list, not 2. :wink:


----------



## Pzy-Clone (Sep 25, 2008)

lets not be so assertive here, there are pros and cons to every approach, and i agree with Asher 100%.

And besides...Ed , how come you are so certain everyone want their stuff to sound like Star Wars? i for sure dont, and even if i wanted to, theres no library , dry or wet, that will get me that sound.

Again, lets give DVZ a chance when its out, and if most peole cant afford it, i dont see why they bother being so opinionated about it...


----------



## Ashermusic (Sep 25, 2008)

Ned Bouhalassa @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> Jay,
> 
> It's not so much a difficulty as it is a p.i.t.a. when you'd rather be composing.
> 
> PS: that's 3 things in your list, not 2. :wink:



I know, I was editing it as you posted


----------



## Ed (Sep 25, 2008)

Ashermusic @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> Ed @ Thu Sep 25 said:
> 
> 
> > Ash, you didnt answer my questions.
> ...



No you didnt, you skated around them. Here they are again. 

1.Its entirely subjective? So recording in Abbey Roads studio ala Star Wars is just as good as recording in VSLs silent stage, its all subjective right?

2. You can open up Symphobia, bash out a few notes and play a few chords and people go gah gah over it. AI have had several live official demos and people all hated the sound, they even had a demo on their website, again people hated the sound. How could that be, if what you're saying is true?



> 1. There is nothing that EVERYONE agrees is good.



Who says Star Wars sounds bad? Who says Thomas Newmans orchestra sounds bad? 



> 2. The differences between sample libraries is small compared to the difference between a real orchestra and any sample library.



With this logic all samples are equal, yet they are not. BBB has the best sounding jazz brass, aside from maybe The Trumpet but thats a different animal, and its just a Trumpet. VSLs jazz stuff simply doesnt compare, but according to you its all entiely subjective! In the real world it isnt. People like certian sounds more than others. We look down at general midi sounds because it doesnt sound right. We'd look down at an oboe recorded in a bathroom because it wouldnt sound right. 



> 3. Anyone's assessment of whether Chris sounds, or anyone else's sound "like poo" are just that, your assessment and only valid for yourself or someone who gives your opinion that credibility.
> 
> If I like a library or libraries and write well with it/them to the point where me and my clients are happy, then I do not need validation for the library from folks on a forum, no matter how much I may respect them.


Exactly! Its all about the end product! Show a person two pieces of music. One made with GPO and he may think "hey, thats good!" and then show him the same thing played by the London Symphony recorded at Abbey Roads and Im sure he will think its light years ahead of GPOs rendering.

But according to you everything is entirely subjective! Therefore because a sample librarys "goodness" is subjective and the end result is what you show to your clients that dont know anything about samples, then all they hear is the end result. Whether thats recorded by a real orchestra or not doesnt matter, for all he knows the live LSO version could just be a really good sample library. According to you, how good the GPO sampled version and the LSO versions is all entiely subjective! Why do we bother trying to get good sounding samples anyway, its all subjective! What is good? What is bad? There is no such thing! Its all equally good and bad! Theres no such thing as a badly recorded sample library! .... Right? 

Hey lets record some orchestral samples in your bathroom!! You think it would sound better in a studio? Poppycock! Theres no such thing as better!! :lol:


----------



## Ed (Sep 25, 2008)

Pzy-Clone @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> And besides...Ed , how come you are so certain everyone want their stuff to sound like Star Wars? i for sure dont, and even if i wanted to, theres no library , dry or wet, that will get me that sound.



I didnt just talk about Star War it was just an example, but that is something that everyone says sounds good. You may want a DIFFERENT sound, but thats bescides the point. People arent saying they think AI or GPO sounds good but they would prefer a different sound. They are saying they dont LIKE the sound. Who says that about Star Wars?


----------



## Ashermusic (Sep 25, 2008)

Ed @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> Ashermusic @ Thu Sep 25 said:
> 
> 
> > Ed @ Thu Sep 25 said:
> ...



One last post...

1. There are those who do not like the way Star Wars sounds. Google it. 

2. No one who knows any thing about music thinks any sample library sounds as good as a good orchestra. Of course.

3. There is no universal way to evaluate whether a sample library is well recorded. The developers have different tastes, different philosophies, and different resources."Good sounding samples" is a matter of opinion. "People like" is a generalization that is frankly meaningless.

4. Evaluating a library strictly by its demos is like evaluating an elephant simply by holding its trunk. You have to play it to know how it will work or not work for you. . At NAMM, many who were trying out Audio Impressions were ling what they were hearing when they played it.

5. There are folks who will make better sounding music with GPO or another low end library than some others with all the VSL stuff or EW stuff. It's the guy, not the gear.

Can I please be done with this now?


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 25, 2008)

From what I understand, it doesn't require any more or fewer computers than you'd expect for a Kontakt library of its size.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Sep 25, 2008)

OK, everyone now act as if Jay is not around. :lol:


----------



## choc0thrax (Sep 25, 2008)

Ok now I can say that all his comments now make sense when you factor in he used to work with Chris Stone. /\~O


----------



## Ashermusic (Sep 25, 2008)

Ned Bouhalassa @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> OK, everyone now act as if Jay is not around. :lol:





:lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## Ed (Sep 25, 2008)

Ashermusic @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> One last post...
> 
> 1. There are those who do not like the way Star Wars sounds. Google it.



Really? Well I tried a bunch of search combinations and couldnt come up with anything. How about you give me a hint? Remember disliking the MUSIC is not the same as disliking the sound of the recording.

And btw, Im sure you can find a small amount of people that are the exception to most rules. Some people are more than happy with the sound of general MIDI. But generally people like real instruments and they like well recorded orchestral instruments. We put orchestral instruments in a nice hall because thats where they sound best. We record an orchestra in a good studio because they sound good recorded in one. Thats why people generally like Abbey Roads compared to the local gym, and not just because Abbey Roads has a famous history. We DO NOT record an orchestra in bathrooms or bedrooms or parking lots or sheds or giant boomy open spaces because we know they dont sound good there. 

The general public dont usually know WHY something sounds weird, all they know is it doesnt sound right. Thats why when you show someone some sampled orchestra, they may not say "well it sounds like samples", but they are more likely to say "it sounds weird". Or, you may get your samples sounding pretty damn good, and they like it, but you know that if you had recorded it with a great orchestra in a great studio with great engineers you know they'd like it even more. If you can get them to be happy with GPO, then good for you. But dont tell me a recording by the LSO isnt considered better sounding by most people. 



> 2. No one who knows any thing about music thinks any sample library sounds as good as a good orchestra. Of course.



But thats exactly what you are saying. Its all about the end result that you show your client, or listeners. You said it yourself. It doesnt matter where you got the sounds from. Live, sampled. It makes no difference. All that matters it what it sounds like. All they will hear is something that they like or they dont like. If its sampled its more likely going to sound "weird" to them, because its not natural and their brain will think somethings wrong with it. A really good orchestral mockup is preferable to a really badly recorded badly performed live orchestra. Its all about the end result. 

<snip>



> 4. Evaluating a library strictly by its demos is like evaluating an elephant simply by holding its trunk. You have to play it to know how it will work or not work for you. . At NAMM, many who were trying out Audio Impressions were ling what they were hearing when they played it.



Really, because Ive only heard bad opinions about the sound and only good things about the technology. If there was some complimentary comment about the sound it went by so fast its like pouring a glass of milk in the ocean, it aint never gonna make the sea turn to sweet milky bovine juice. When you see a quick and dirty Symphobia demo where someones played a bunch of chords without any tweaking gets so much praise, and an official demo and a few live video demos by AI are all generally disliked, it should make you rethink your theory. But its all entirely subjective I forget. Who cares what "most people" think. 



> 5. There are folks who will make better sounding music with GPO or another low end library than some others with all the VSL stuff or EW stuff. It's the guy, not the gear.



VSL can sound terrible and GPO can sound okay, but if you have the talent to make GPO sound okay means that if you had VSL you could probably make that sound amazing.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Sep 25, 2008)

Excellent post, fellow weirdo creature. Thanks for giving me a great quote for my signature!


----------



## Ed (Sep 25, 2008)

You're a lot cuter than me though!


----------



## hbuus (Sep 25, 2008)

But is there such a thing as a cuter profile photo? I mean: Isn't "cuter" in fact a subjective matter?

*ducks REAL quick!*


----------



## Ed (Sep 25, 2008)

lux @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> care to elaborate better for what? you know, we probably share the same preference, but still i suggest you to see things from several points of view, because not all the recorded orchestral material, or the general use of orchestral manouvres in hundred musical experiences sound the same. No way.
> 
> As said i use Vsl a lot when blending with other instruments on pop/electronica/funk/rock. It sounds very good.
> 
> Limiting ourselves to a scale with just two measures, "superhypespectramarteenmalmsjo" and "it sucks" sounds a bit dull to me.



Well its very simple really, if you subscribe to Ashers theory whether a flute is recorded in a bathroom or recorded in Abbey Roads, its all entirley subjective which ones sounds better. If you want to tell me that occasionally you might want a weird sounding flute, fine, but most of the time Bathroom Flute is not something I want when writing orchestral music.

VSL may work combined in pop electronica but you know if it was recorded in a great studio, even close miced, it would sound even better. They made the silent stage based on their theory that they needed it to get their performance tools to work , not so they could get a great sound.


----------



## Daryl (Sep 25, 2008)

Christian Marcussen @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> Ed @ Thu Sep 25 said:
> 
> 
> > Lux are you suggesting that the Silent stage sounds better that EW studios (or similar)?
> ...


I also don't think that VSL made a mistake with the Silent Stage. All orchestral sample libraries involve a compromise of some sort. The trick is to use one which has the least compromise for the work that you do. There is no other library that will allow me to do the work that I do, apart from VSL. For others the choice may well be different. For example, EWQLSO would be next to useless for 90% of my work. However, that doesn't mean that I think it was a mistake to record the way they did. For some people, it is just the ticket.

I also don't think that the VSL approach will be the last word in sampling. In years to come, modelling using real time controls will almost certainly become more sophisticated, and this may well work better for me, but at the moment the VSL approach is the best for my work.

Having spent over 10 years earning my living as a conductor, I can say that VSL sounds closer to what an orchestra can do than other libraries. However, whilst I wouldn't pretend that it sounds real, it does allow me to write my demos with the articulations that a real orchestra would do, and therefore the client can more easily hear what the orchestra is likely to sound like. I don't have to swamp it in reverb just to give some impression of connectivity between notes. 8) 

D


----------



## TheoKrueger (Sep 25, 2008)

Sometimes a 5MB free soundfont can sound -perfect- for some applications while the best samples in the world would pale in comparison for that specific theme/song. Personally i think its more about the feeling/warmth/clarity and consistency of the samples rather than how real they sound. If it sounds good, its good. Simple as that. There's 2000 people in here and they all have a different pair of ears. In the end i think that no one outside the cirlce of samplicians in here really care about the "realism" of the music. Ordinary people listen to the music, and not even that in most occasions. Something has to be nice and speak to your heart to catch your attention. Does classical music do that always? and its the real thing we're talking about. I vote less realism and SUPER quality and size for better music.


----------



## Niah (Sep 25, 2008)

TheoKrueger @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> Sometimes a 5MB free soundfont can sound -perfect- for some applications while the best samples in the world would pale in comparison for that specific theme/song. Personally i think its more about the feeling/warmth/clarity and consistency of the samples rather than how real they sound. If it sounds good, its good. Simple as that. There's 2000 people in here and they all have a different pair of ears. In the end i think that no one outside the cirlce of samplicians in here really care about the "realism" of the music. Ordinary people listen to the music, and not even that in most occasions. Something has to be nice and speak to your heart to catch your attention. Does classical music do that always? and its the real thing we're talking about. I vote less realism and SUPER quality and size for better music.



WELCOME BACK MAN ! o-[][]-o


----------



## Ed (Sep 25, 2008)

TheoKrueger @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> Sometimes a 5MB free soundfont can sound -perfect- for some applications while the best samples in the world would pale in comparison for that specific theme/song.



I'll tell you the reason for that. It was probably recorded well the first time and it was performed really well.  I have some sounds like that as well. 



Christian Marcussen @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> But to be VSL+AltiVerb sounds better (or closer to what I want) than EW Studios... Yes.



Compared to what though? Im talking about the *room *sound. You can spend ages with these EQing tricks with VSL to get rid of the nasty frequencies that the silent stage produces, then douse it in a stage impluse like some Hollwood scoring stage, *then *put your mix in nice hall or through an impluse of a high end reverb... and yes, that *can *sound nice after that, but you are trying to fix the problems *created *by not recording it in a nice room to begin with. The Silent Stage is not a room designed to get a good *sound*. Simple.

A few people were gobsmacked at the idea that I said EQing shouldnt be necessary, well Thomas J, whos mockups we all love, said over and over that he never EQ'd anything. His trick was getting the "mix" right with reverb. So you shouldnt need to EQ, just to get a good sound. It shouldnt be the first thing you have to do in order to use the sounds. 



Daryl @ Posted: Thu Sep 25 said:


> I also don't think that VSL made a mistake with the Silent Stage. All orchestral sample libraries involve a compromise of some sort. The trick is to use one which has the least compromise for the work that you do. There is no other library that will allow me to do the work that I do, apart from VSL. For others the choice may well be different. For example, EWQLSO would be next to useless for 90% of my work. However, that doesn't mean that I think it was a mistake to record the way they did. For some people, it is just the ticket.
> 
> I also don't think that the VSL approach will be the last word in sampling. In years to come, modelling using real time controls will almost certainly become more sophisticated, and this may well work better for me, but at the moment the VSL approach is the best for my work.
> 
> Having spent over 10 years earning my living as a conductor, I can say that VSL sounds closer to what an orchestra can do than other libraries. However, whilst I wouldn't pretend that it sounds real, it does allow me to write my demos with the articulations that a real orchestra would do, and therefore the client can more easily hear what the orchestra is likely to sound like. I don't have to swamp it in reverb just to give some impression of connectivity between notes.



You said they didnt make a mistake with the silent stage, why? Just what did the silent stage enable them to do? A few years ago you'd be able to tell me, well with the silent stage they can provide us with real legato, round robin etc, things you just cant do without their silent stage! And now we have things like BBB which sounds better than VSL and comes with 3 mic positions and sounds a heckeva lot better than the Jazz offerings by VSL. So knowing that the Silent Stage has no bearing on the performance capabilities, just what is it good for? How can it not be described as anything but a failed theory on their part?You like VSL, thats fine. You like it because its detailed so you can perform all the articulations you are thinking about. Thats a good reason to like it and I agree with you! But as I've been saying, thats not an argument you can use for the use of the silent stage anymore.


----------



## Daryl (Sep 25, 2008)

Ed @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> You said they didnt make a mistake with the silent stage, why? Just what did the silent stage enable them to do? A few years ago you'd be able to tell me, well with the silent stage they can provide us with real legato, round robin etc, things you just cant do without their silent stage! And now we have things like BBB which sounds better than VSL and comes with 3 mic positions and sounds a heckeva lot better than the Jazz offerings by VSL. So knowing that the Silent Stage has no bearing on the performance capabilities, just what is it good for? How can it not be described as anything but a failed theory on their part?You like VSL, thats fine. You like it because its detailed so you can perform all the articulations you are thinking about. Thats a good reason to like it and I agree with you! But as I've been saying, thats not an argument you can use for the use of the silent stage anymore.


The Silent stage wasn't a mistake, because no other orchestral library can do what VSL can. When that changes, it will still not be a mistake, because future possibilities don't eradicate past successes. BBB is mostly irrelevant, as it is not an orchestral library. I don't know how the workings of BBB would translate to orchestral material, and neither do you, until it becomes a reality. I don't use any jazz samples from VSL, so I have no opinion about those. I like VSL, because it allows me to get the sound and articulations I want.

BTW, I don't know any professional engineer who doesn't use EQ, and that includes all the guys at your beloved Abbey Road Studios. :D 

D


----------



## TheoKrueger (Sep 25, 2008)

WELCOME BACK MAN ! o-[][]-o[/quote]

Man... i forgot! I'M SO HAPPY TO SEE YOU ALL HERE :D I look forward to talking to everyone again! Cheers o-[][]-o


----------



## Ed (Sep 25, 2008)

Daryl @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> The Silent stage wasn't a mistake, because no other orchestral library can do what VSL can. When that changes, it will still not be a mistake, because future possibilities don't eradicate past successes. BBB is mostly irrelevant, as it is not an orchestral library. I don't know how the workings of BBB would translate to orchestral material, and neither do you, until it becomes a reality. I don't use any jazz samples from VSL, so I have no opinion about those. I like VSL, because it allows me to get the sound and articulations I want.



What a strange argument... 

If they didnt have the silent stage... _where_... would they have recorded? ... is that it?... In a studio, probably. Or they would have built a studio that sounded good, rather than trying to make one that sounded really really dry to support their theory that they need one in order to offer these performance tools they were developing. 

If I record the most articualtions of any library, the most realistic library ever -- *in my shed*, it may sound realistic but its going to sound like the instruments are recorded in a shed, and so, it will sound terrible. And yet, you could still say, no other orchestral library can do what mine can. "_BUY NOW The most realistic Bathroom and Shed collection of orchestral samples the world has ever seen!!!_"... Grreeeaat!  

How _wouldnt _the BBB translate to orchestral material?? If they can do what they did with Jazz instruments, which is the hardest thing to pull off with samples, how could it _not _work with classical articulations and playing styles? 



> BTW, I don't know any professional engineer who doesn't use EQ, and that includes all the guys at your beloved Abbey Road Studios. :D



Thats great, but thats a well engineered recording you're talking about. Thats what we get with samples, we get a certain sound. VSL gives you a sound you usually need to do a lot to just to get it to sound like it was recorded in a natural way. You CAN use EQ to make things sound a little better, but you shouldnt need to EQ out nasty resonances because your room is weird.


----------



## Daryl (Sep 25, 2008)

Ed, there is no point in getting into an argument over any of this. You obviously have very different experiences than mine.

However, I would really suggest that you learn something about professional recording. Do you really think that engineers don't EQ more than just the final mix? So if it's OK for professional engineers with live musicians, why isn't it OK for us with sampled instruments?

D


----------



## Ed (Sep 25, 2008)

Daryl @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> However, I would really suggest that you learn something about professional recording. Do you really think that engineers don't EQ more than just the final mix? So if it's OK for professional engineers with live musicians, why isn't it OK for us with sampled instruments?



Because we usually dont get 100% raw recordings with samples we buy. And again EQing to sit better in a mix is not the same as EQing out weird room resonances.


----------



## Peter Alexander (Sep 25, 2008)

VSL doesn't have any "jazz" programs. What I said in my review of the Vienna Special Edition is that there's sufficient material with Vienna Special Edition that with the inclusion of the saxes and other programs it was possible to create basic jazz ensembles from Super Sax, Glenn Miller, and various R&B ensembles. Those are combinations I observed were possible. The articulations available are what's standard with Vienna. 

There are no short falls, long falls, doiks, etc., within the articulation list.

RE: the Silent Stage being a mistake (or however it was expressed). I have to disagree and I think that's really unfair to characterize Vienna that way. 

Every library is a tool. Vienna is a tool that lets you move in directions different from other libraries. Adding to what Daryl said, you have great flexibility for creating alternate ensembles and working with vocalists.


----------



## Daryl (Sep 25, 2008)

Ed @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> Daryl @ Thu Sep 25 said:
> 
> 
> > However, I would really suggest that you learn something about professional recording. Do you really think that engineers don't EQ more than just the final mix? So if it's OK for professional engineers with live musicians, why isn't it OK for us with sampled instruments?
> ...


EQ is EQ. I find that the room resonances change, depending on what reverbs I am using. You may not want to EQ stuff, but engineering is a price that we all have to pay these days. I don't need a sequencer or samples. A pencil and paper will do. However, the clients do need to hear something, so I have to give as good an approximation as possible. When there is another orchestral sample library, recorded in an ambient acoustic, that can do this better than VSL, I will give your opinion more credence. At the moment there is no such library, so it is just supposition on your part.

To get back to the subject of this thread, I like the theory behind DVZ, but until I hear something that works, it is of no use to me.

D


----------



## Ed (Sep 25, 2008)

Peter Alexander @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> VSL doesn't have any "jazz" programs. What I said in my review of the Vienna Special Edition is that there's sufficient material with Vienna Special Edition that with the inclusion of the saxes and other programs it was possible to create basic jazz ensembles from Super Sax, Glenn Miller, and various R&B ensembles. Those are combinations I observed were possible. The articulations available are what's standard with Vienna.
> 
> There are no short falls, long falls, doiks, etc., within the articulation list.


So if you buy VSL Saxophones, you should *not *expect to be able to... you know... make it play anything that sounds like jazz? ...Srsly? :| But that would explain why every demo I ever heard with them sounded weird....

Anyway what does that have to do with it? 



> RE: the Silent Stage being a mistake (or however it was expressed). I have to disagree and I think that's really unfair to characterize Vienna that way.



You know people keep saying that but never give any reason why.

The Silent Stage was a mistake... _It wasnt a mistake!_ ... Well why did they make it? ... _So they could offer real legato!_ ... But you dont need a silent stage to do that... *silence*..._ It wasnt a mistake!_



> Every library is a tool. Vienna is a tool that lets you move in directions different from other libraries. Adding to what Daryl said, you have great flexibility for creating alternate ensembles and working with vocalists.



But you could have made it *sound *better if you built a room designed to *sound good* rather than built one designed to service a *theory *that they needed it to be that way in order to sample their peformance tools.


----------



## Ed (Sep 25, 2008)

Daryl @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> When there is another orchestral sample library, recorded in an ambient acoustic, that can do this better than VSL, I will give your opinion more credence. At the moment there is no such library, so it is just supposition on your part.



Imagine a fictional hypothetical situation where we are all using sounds recorded in bathrooms, and someone goes... _hey why doesnt someone record some orchestral instruments in a real hall or nice studio, that would sound much better_!!... ...and some other guy looks at him and is very skeptical and says... _well... that sounds like crazy talk to me, I've certianly never seen that before and what I have works for me so until I see it done, its all supposition on your part._ Seriously, you say you've worked with orchestras for 15 years and you cant tell that recording something in a nice sounding studio or hall is better than recording in a dry lifeless room? 



> To get back to the subject of this thread, I like the theory behind DVZ, but until I hear something that works, it is of no use to me.



Same. VSL never claimed to be faster, it claimed to be detailed. This thing claims to be faster, so to defend a product (like some people here have done) that doesnt sound good out of the box, by talking about other libraries that do need a bit of massaging (or in the case of VSL a lot of massaging), is saying the library doesnt work! o 


Ed

(I feel a little like Bruce ~o) )


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 25, 2008)

You look a little like Bruce too.

But you know, there's an elephant in the room: until the AI trunk show, this is a heated argument about absolutely nothing.


----------



## Ed (Sep 25, 2008)

I like a heated argument sometimes Nick, makes me feel alive. Makes me feel like at any moment I could aspload!!! Makes me feel like I want to shout it from the roof tops that life just couldnt get any better than this BABY!!!!! o=< o=< o=< 

...


...but also I was very bored today.


----------



## Daryl (Sep 25, 2008)

Ed @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> Seriously, you say you've worked with orchestras for 15 years and you cant tell that recording something in a nice sounding studio or hall is better than recording in a dry lifeless room?
> 
> Ed


No I never said that.

Firstly, I said I conducted professionally for 10 years. I've actually been working as a professional with professional orchestras for a little over 25 years.

Secondly "recording something" and producing a sample library are two different things. I've recorded many times at Abbey Road, but I wouldn't want a sample library recorded there, unless it was possible to make the various articulations work. So far that has not been the case with any ambient orchestral library, so until the technology exists to make it work, it is of no use to me.

I would suggest that you play a sample mock-up of one of your pieces against the same piece recorded in a studio with a professional orchestra and see how well your ambient samples can do the job. Badly, I would imagine. However I know that VSL will give a good approximation of my stuff.

D


----------



## Ed (Sep 25, 2008)

Daryl @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> Ed @ Thu Sep 25 said:
> 
> 
> > Seriously, you say you've worked with orchestras for 15 years and you cant tell that recording something in a nice sounding studio or hall is better than recording in a dry lifeless room?
> ...



... Does that make any difference to my point?



> Secondly "recording something" and producing a sample library are two different things. I've recorded many times at Abbey Road, but I wouldn't want a sample library recorded there, unless it was possible to make the various articulations work. So far that has not been the case with any ambient orchestral library, so until the technology exists to make it work, it is of no use to me.



Well, thats where you're wrong and thats why I keep referencing BBB which you keep ignoring. They recorded in a studio with 3 mic positions. If it was all dry, 3 mic positions are for... what? Dry, Dryer and Driest? Dont be silly. 



> I would suggest that you play a sample mock-up of one of your pieces against the same piece recorded in a studio with a professional orchestra and see how well your ambient samples can do the job. Badly, I would imagine. However I know that VSL will give a good approximation of my stuff.


Isnt it funny then, that we have the best mockup guys using mostly ambient samples (PP), and that have also said that VSL would not give them the same sound. If VSL works for you personally, great. But we have more than enough evidence that VSLs approach with the silent stage is not necessary and other approaches are better. 

Ed


----------



## Daryl (Sep 25, 2008)

Ed, I can see that you have your own opinion, and nothing I can say will alter that, so I won't waste my time any further. Time for bed for me. Lot's of work to do tomorrow.

D


----------



## Ed (Sep 25, 2008)

Same to you Daryl, same to you. I just wish people that disagree would address the actual questions and points. 

Sleep well! It sure is something I should be doing instead of wasting time on youtube.


----------



## Pzy-Clone (Sep 25, 2008)

ED: yeah..well i dont know what points you are actualy trying to communicate here, are u trying to say anything with this rant? 

...that you dont like VSL and DVZ?
So what is there to address?

All i hear is, "it sux becouse i think so."
...that kinda stops any sensible discussion dead in its tracks...


----------



## Ed (Sep 25, 2008)

Pzy-Clone @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> ED: yeah..well i dont know what points you are actualy trying to communicate here, are u trying to say anything with this rant?



Well for example, all the people that have defended VSLs silent stage keep ignoring BBB. Its like Ive told them, a few years ago you might have been able to say... _the silent stage is necessary so we can provide you with real legato and all our performance tools._ .... but now we have a product like BBB (_which is not the only example btw_) that does everything VSL does, done with Jazz instruments (the hardest instruments to get right). But not only that, they provide 3 mic positions, you know, so you can have a choice of how ambient and close you want your sample to sound.... _But wait, this means that you can have real legato without recording in a dry life sucking room, right?_ ... and I tell them this, and they say..._ well you see VSL doesnt have any Jazz instruments_... and Im thinking... _well, actually yes they do - but whats that got to do with it? Did you even listen to me!?_ Or they say something like... _yes yes but BBB is not relevant as its Jazz not orchestral and I have found ambient libraries dont sound as realistic as VSL because VSL gives you so many more articualtions and we dont know if the technques in BBB can be applied to orchestral instruments and btw we dont know if its possible to make VSL performance techniques work with an ambient recording. _.... And i just think ..._ wait...whaat? Are you trying to not listen to me on purpose?!_ And someone said I wasnt going to change _my _mind?

 



> ...that you dont like VSL and DVZ?
> So what is there to address?



I brought up VSL becuase you said we should be used to processing and massaging sample libraries. I never said I didnt like VSL, I brought up their failed theory about the silent stage. As for DVZ, Im saying I think it will be bad because of the live video demos, because of the demo on the website, because they have sampled every instrument known to man, because you need to base an entire production system around it and because it costs the price of a small house. I dont _know _if I'll be right but experience tells me I probably will be. 



> All i hear is, "it sux becouse i think so."
> ...that kinda stops any sensible discussion dead in its tracks...



Well, thats not what I said. 

Ed


----------



## cc64 (Sep 25, 2008)

Ned Bouhalassa @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> As a very new user of VSL (I have the Chamber strings), I have to agree that I've had to EQ harmonics out of certain notes that were very annoying, as they stick out every time those specific notes are heard.



Hi Ned I've bought Appassionata II recently for the "muted orchestral sound". I'm quite happy except that almost all samples in the C# D# range just below middle C sound more like a sine wave than a Cello. I thought maybe it was my room or my new ADAM A7s...but reading your post it seems you've found similar problems with some VSL samples.

I wrote about it a few times on the VSL forum and had 0 replies so i thought i was the only one having issues with this.

Best,

CC64


----------



## Ed (Sep 27, 2008)

Did he say anything about Altiverb? Be nice to have an example of this.


----------



## KingIdiot (Sep 27, 2008)

quick reply about VSL without reading the whole thread

I believe th Silent Stage wasnt used purely because the performance samples. I think the whole idea was to have samples that would be "flexible" without being "dry". To not have a signature room sound and early reflection/psitioning data that was impossible to remove. The Silent stage makes it more "flexible" but of course it requires more work to get it to sound "right".

For what VSL want(ed?) to achieve (not just focus on being a TV/Film composers template, but be a comprehensive source of orchestral material that could be manipulated after the fact to fit whatever "sound" one would want), it was the probably the right move.

The issue is, most of us have been using these samples to achieve that "Film" sound, and are finding it easier to achieve that using samples recorded in more reverberant spaces. Who knows, once MIR comes out things might be very different. MIR doesnt look like it will be jsut about Reverb IRs, but might do intelligent filtering through Multiple IRs to create really different sounding instruments. Maybe even some synthesis, you never know.

I just have a hard time hearing someone suggest that they used a "wrong" approach. Their goals are much loftier than catering to a specific market. (That doesnt mean that they havent changed some f their strategies to cater with some products, but I think they still have a specific personal, yet broader, passion overall)

As for DVZ, 

sigh... I wish they'd stop with the "demo" press releases, but take the rig to working composers places, or have them come in and show them one on one what it can do. If its good, then word of mouth should get going.

Maybe even video tape reactions and share them like Moog did with the Moog guitar. If its good, then the word of mouth should be good. If its not....

bummer, cuz it should be awesome....

I dont have much more to say about it that doesnt seem like I'm bashing AI... and well I kind of feel sorry for how they are perceived, cuz it seems like such an ambitious project that I want to be supportive... they jsut need to get better at their marketing I guess.


----------



## midphase (Sep 27, 2008)

"sigh... I wish they'd stop with the "demo" press releases, but take the rig to working composers places, or have them come in and show them one on one what it can do."


hmmm...they have been doing that already, have guys come in to their facility to audition the system one on one.

"If its good, then word of mouth should get going."

Bingo!


----------



## midphase (Sep 27, 2008)

In all fairness, I think the AI guys realize (and have been realizing) that there is an issue with DVZ. I bet they have been very busy at work for the better part of the part year to try and address all of the concerns, and I am giving them the benefit of the doubt and hoping that they will unveil a new and improved DVZ that will be very impressive.


This BTW reminds me a lot of working on a movie where the director and producers get bad test audience scores and then go scrambling to "fix" the film. Sometimes they can make changes and salvage the movie....and sometimes they actually make things worse.


----------



## Reegs (Sep 27, 2008)

So did anyone go to the expo???

What have the good folks at Ai been doing? :D


----------



## Mr. Anxiety (Sep 27, 2008)

HaHa!

Are we all just a bunch of out of work composers here,with too much time on our hands, or just a bunch of composers with some serious time wasting issues!


There's gotta be something better to discuss!


----------



## cc64 (Sep 28, 2008)

Pzy-Clone @ Sat Sep 27 said:


> well, doesnt seem like your having much better luck here either
> 
> ok try to stick a hipass filter on the fx channel (altiverb ?) at around 300HZ, BEFORE the actual reverb plugin. (use a insert.)
> That way the "nasty" resonance at around 250HZ isnt exagerated and amplified in the reverb, without removing the instruments "body" in the direct sound.. Should do the trick.
> ...



Hi Pzy-Clone thanks for helping out, i'll try your trick even though i don't have Altiverb, i use the Wavearts reverb, but you are obviously right about the reverb amplifying the problematic frequencies...But i find that the frequencies are exagerated even without added reverb.

@ Ned If you have a chance, could you please confirm that i understand you right about having the same type of problem with VSL Chamber Strings? I seem to recall SVK also mentioning something similar.

TIA

CC64


----------



## Pzy-Clone (Sep 28, 2008)

cc64 @ Sun Sep 28 said:


> Pzy-Clone @ Sat Sep 27 said:
> 
> 
> > well, doesnt seem like your having much better luck here either
> ...



well, i dont have the Muted appasionata strings...but from the other vsl strings i experienced that there were similiar "issues". However...i dont see it as a problem at all.
Its just a part of the natural harmonics , and if it interferes in the mix, you can always eq them out, as they are very specific frequencies that can be removed.
But i cannot tell you exactly where its at, since i dont have the appasionata 2 strings.

For close strings, i usualy eq out some of the body and hi-end anyways to get a less upfront sound, so i never thought that was a problem for VSl or any other close recorded stuff. More the opposite realy, since you can control the amount of "body" you want in the sound yourself.


----------



## horselesspaul (Oct 5, 2008)

Pzy-Clone @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> Awww, dont fret, at least they have a
> "Kazoo Ensemble" :D


----------



## horselesspaul (Oct 5, 2008)

Pzy-Clone @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> Again, lets give DVZ a chance when its out, and if most people cant afford it, i dont see why they bother being so opinionated about it...


Precisely _because_ they can't afford it, usually.


----------



## dcoscina (Oct 5, 2008)

it is just a little strange that this library is marketed to "professionals" but what with the price tag the only guys who would buy this are guys like JamesNewton Howard and Hans Zimmer who already have access to real orchestras....


----------



## Reegs (Oct 5, 2008)

I rewatched the NAMM demos, and I have to say, I was MUCH more impressed with that demonstration than the noodling MP3 they put up. Sure, you lost a lot of clarity from the NAMM floor, but the legato detection and execution seemed a whole lot better there than in the MP3.

The Bartok snaps were absolutely lovely.

It's out of my price range too, but I'm still looking forward to seeing what they can do when they hit market. I'm hoping it won't all be behind closed doors and strictly word of mouth either, and that they might possibly drop the price to at least VSL levels.

I mean, they're going to have to attract a user base high enough to recoup development costs, aren't they? That will be easier to do with lower-cost, higher volume sales, I would think.

-Reegs


----------



## Christian Marcussen (Oct 5, 2008)

Yeah, the NAMM demo was more impressive surely. I was pretty impressed by the played Ligeti-like effects.


----------



## Ed (Oct 6, 2008)

horselesspaul @ Sun Oct 05 said:


> Pzy-Clone @ Thu Sep 25 said:
> 
> 
> > Again, lets give DVZ a chance when its out, and if most people cant afford it, i dont see why they bother being so opinionated about it...
> ...



So you're saying... Im just jealous?


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Oct 6, 2008)

cc64 @ 28/9/2008 said:


> @ Ned If you have a chance, could you please confirm that i understand you right about having the same type of problem with VSL Chamber Strings? I seem to recall SVK also mentioning something similar.



Absolument, my friend, Habs-olument. :wink:


----------



## scottgoldberg (Oct 9, 2008)

I was lucky enough to be paying attention at the AES show this last weekend. I went outside for a break and my friend was standing with a guy who seemed to be very bright and interesting. Being this was AES, I was not surprised, except that he was talking to me and giving me great advice on a project I am attempting to sell to the History Channel.

We started talking shop and realized that I could help show him some things he hadn't noticed, and he was going to buy the two items. We then went to "His" booth and he commenced to showing us (my friends) his DVX strings and orchestra. It was nothing short of amazing. 

He had designed the GUI, miked the orchestra with vintage gear and microphones, and you could tell easily. He had a layout of the pit, moveable people in the pit, and mostly, tremendous sounding strings the played together as if they were the orchestra. The types of placements he used, left no reason for reverb, plus he had figured out how to easily display and show us different levels of playing, how to play short notes, legato, quiet with bowing continuing throughout the passages. You could hear the bow getting softer and louder as the violin played...same FX with low strings. They stayed constant with long slow bowing techniques.

I'd go on but I am too tired. I hope some of the people at AES saw this and really checked it out. 

Scott Goldberg
Gold Recordings 
Mikpitas, CA 95035
http://www.goldrecordings.comm :D


----------



## choc0thrax (Oct 10, 2008)

AHAHAHAHA


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 10, 2008)

They were there, Jeff. I saw them, and they had some really good high-end speakers they're importing too.


----------



## JB78 (Oct 16, 2008)

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=kQWcOQ1zY74

1st of 4 videos from AES.


----------



## artsoundz (Oct 16, 2008)

well...after all this time, all the discussions,and THIS is the presentation? I can hear through the garbage that it sounds pretty good but I have to try SO hard.

I understand that it's a quick and dirty AES video- but if it were my baby and I knew all about youtube-I would anticipate and make my own vids available first.

How hard is it to make a few semi-pro videos that present this product well? Answer-extremely easy. So- I come away from this irritated and not excited enough to view the rest at the moment but yet remain interested. FYI,Chris STone.


----------



## wqaxsz (Oct 16, 2008)

:mrgreen: 

The comments coming from the other guy made me laugh so hard: "oh wow" 

Thanks

Regards

TneruaL


----------



## Ed (Oct 16, 2008)

artsoundz @ Thu Oct 16 said:


> I understand that it's a quick and dirty AES video- but if it were my baby and I knew all about youtube-I would anticipate and make my own vids available first..



The reason they dont is in my opinion obvious. They clearly dont believe the product can handle the scrutiny and have to hide behind these badly recorded live demos where people just have to "IMAGINE" and "HOPE". 

Ed


----------



## synthetic (Oct 16, 2008)

AES is mostly recording engineers, so this is all new technology to them. 

I agree with your statement, they're hiding behind the poor audio quality of these videos. The only other explanation would be if they're so cash poor that they can't afford the bandwidth for hosting their own demos.


----------



## PolarBear (Oct 16, 2008)

OMG this guy is still playing those same phrases on every show he does? Come on... or is it an urban myth it would work without the crowd around?


----------



## KingIdiot (Oct 16, 2008)

Ed @ Thu Oct 16 said:


> LOLOLOL watching that first video its so hilarious. He plays a tremlo and the guys like "ZOMG SO AMAZING!!!1!"
> 
> EDIT: Oh man this is so funny. Chris says you dont need a soundcard with his MIDI over Lan and the guy is like "NO WAY OMG!!!!" ... hahaa, did they pull this guy off the street knowing absolutely nothing or what???



Actually Its AUDIO over LAN, which is a bit more impressive. If the whole rig is ethernet connection including MIDI AND Audio, then its actually kind of cool. Alot like the Receptor. However latency will have to be commented on.

I actually was a little impressed by that part. The fact that it "only" needs 8gb is cool too. What you get out of a single processor and 8gb will be interesting tho.


----------



## PolarBear (Oct 16, 2008)

synthetic @ Fri Oct 17 said:


> AES is mostly recording engineers, so this is all new technology to them.
> 
> I agree with your statement, they're hiding behind the poor audio quality of these videos. The only other explanation would be if they're so cash poor that they can't afford the bandwidth for hosting their own demos.



It doesn't need to be video and they could afford to be at AES... so?


----------



## Ed (Oct 16, 2008)

PolarBear @ Thu Oct 16 said:


> OMG this guy is still playing those same phrases on every show he does? Come on... or is it an urban myth it would work without the crowd around?



"Crowd not included", you need to buy that separately. :wink:


----------



## PolarBear (Oct 16, 2008)

KingIdiot @ Fri Oct 17 said:


> The fact that it "only" needs 8gb is cool too. What you get out of a single processor and 8gb will be interesting tho.


Well... 64GB RAM holding PCs will be around when it will be released, so I see little point in that also... but yeah, it's a closed rig. And no soundcard (ie. no low latency possible either) needed. Hmm.


----------



## synthetic (Oct 16, 2008)

This just in, the Strings have been updated to version 2.0!

http://news.harmony-central.com/Newp/2008/Audio-Impressions-DVZ-Strings-Library-Version-2.0.html (http://news.harmony-central.com/Newp/20 ... n-2.0.html)

This might be a first: software updated to version 2.0 before you ship the product? I didn't think it was available for sale yet.


----------



## Ed (Oct 16, 2008)

KingIdiot @ Thu Oct 16 said:


> Actually Its AUDIO over LAN, which is a bit more impressive. If the whole rig is ethernet connection including MIDI AND Audio, then its actually kind of cool. Alot like the Receptor. However latency will have to be commented on.




Sorry you are right. Actually a typo because I was so enthusiastic to post about it. :lol: 



> I actually was a little impressed by that part. The fact that it "only" needs 8gb is cool too. What you get out of a single processor and 8gb will be interesting tho.



How can you be impressed by audio over lan? How long has FX teleport been out? that was impressive THEN. Hell, Ive been using Giga Teleport for over 2 years if I remember correctly. 

As for 8 Gigs, yes it is if it gives that sound. Sounds pretty AMAZING for such a small size. But who cares, becuase you still need a bloody huge setup to run the thing and bascally pay what it costs to buy a small house to get their orchestra. With all that money just think what you could buy! You could probably get a real studio kitted out with a lot of great gear and samples and probably even have enough over to go record a bunch of custom samples AND pay to have them edited and programmed FOR you! Dont forget how much JUST the strings cost, not counting what you have to spend on the systems and so on.


----------



## KingIdiot (Oct 16, 2008)

Ed @ Thu Oct 16 said:


> KingIdiot @ Thu Oct 16 said:
> 
> 
> > Actually Its AUDIO over LAN, which is a bit more impressive. If the whole rig is ethernet connection including MIDI AND Audio, then its actually kind of cool. Alot like the Receptor. However latency will have to be commented on.
> ...




hey Im not gonna get all negative about the price. VSL was fucking bank too when it came out and is a resource hog, but I still liked it when it came out.

my points are more about what I do like about the system so far. not about how crappy it could turn out or is in speculation. I've made my points about all that ages ago when it first started t show up. bitching about the fact that you cant afford it or that its too expensive for you just proves you need to win the lotto, not that its not worth it.

besides worth is subjective.

Will I buy it? FUCK NO! My Lambo is in the shop, and I need solid Gold Faucets for my bathrooms, to match my gold teeth, I also want the image of the last supper at the bottom of my swimming pool (which needs to be built), only I want everyone in the image to be replaced by geckos.....

....but the fact that they put effort into building their own AUDIO and MIDI over LAN driver for their own playback system, built around their own samples. Its pretty impressive to me. More impressive than someone sampling an orchestra and releasing it for existing players with their own limitations. Its not the fact that audio can go over lan, its the fact that someone did it themselves. I wish it would happen more.

Once 64 bit starts taking over, FXT wont be useful anymore, unless its updated.


----------



## Mihkel Zilmer (Oct 16, 2008)

The videos are hilarious, but it's rather difficult to pick up if there's anything in there aside from the obvious comedic value.


----------



## Ed (Oct 16, 2008)

KingIdiot @ Thu Oct 16 said:


> hey Im not gonna get all negative about the price. VSL was [email protected]#king bank too when it came out and is a resource hog, but I still liked it when it came out.
> 
> my points are more about what I do like about the system so far. not about how crappy it could turn out or is in speculation.


Its like I said earlier, they dont want to show you what it sounds like with well made (non live) demos, or even with well recorded _live _demos, I firmly because its because they dont believe the product can survive the scrutiny of such a thing. Of course they have enough money to make a video demo, its ridiculous to even think that may even be a factor but people are still suggesting it desperatly trying to make excuses (even in jest)! They would need a video camera, thats it. They already have good sound recording equipment, you would expect, so, whats the excuse? There isnt. But they sure are more than happy for people to film them in poor audio environments, arent they? Funny that!

But this is why people apologise for them, they say _well maybe it will be better once you spend some time making a proper demo_, or, _maybe it would sound better if it wasnt rò”¸   ˆ®3”¸   ˆ®4”¸   ˆ®5”¸   ˆ®6”¸   ˆ®7”¸   ˆ®8”¸   ˆ®9”¸   ˆ®:”¸   ˆ®;”¸   ˆ®<”¸   ˆ®=”¸   ˆ®>”¸   ˆ®?”¸   ˆ®@”¸   ˆ®A”¸   ˆ®B”¸   ˆ®C”¸   ˆ®D”¸   ˆ®E”¸   ˆ®F”¸   ˆ®G”¸   ˆ®H”¸   ˆ®I”¸   ˆ®J”¸   ˆ®K”¸   ˆ®L”¸   ˆ®M”¸   ˆ®N”¸   ˆ®O”¸   ˆ®P”¸   ˆ®Q”¸   ˆ®R”¸   ˆ®S”¸   ˆ®T”¸   ˆ®U”¸   ˆ®V”¸   ˆ®W”¸   ˆ®X”¸   ˆ®Y”¸   ˆ®Z”¸   ˆ®[”¸   ˆ®\”¸   ˆ®]”¸   ˆ®^”¸   ˆ®_”¸   ˆ®`”¹   ˆ­É”¹   ˆ­Ê”¹   ˆ®a”¹   ˆ®b”¹   ˆ®c”¹   ˆ®d”¹   ˆ®e”¹   ˆ®f”¹   ˆ®g”¹   ˆ®h”¹   ˆ®i”¹   ˆ®j”¹   ˆ®k”¹   ˆ®l”¹   ˆ®m”¹   ˆ®n”¹   ˆ®o”¹   ˆ®p”¹   ˆ®q”¹   ˆ®r”¹   ˆ®s”¹   ˆ®t”¹   ˆ®u”¹   ˆ®v”¹   ˆ®w”¹   ˆ®x”¹   ˆ®y”¹   ˆ®z”¹   ˆ®{”¹   ˆ®|”¹   ˆ®}”¹   ˆ®~”¹   ˆ®”¹   ˆ®€”¹   ˆ®”¹   ˆ®‚”¹   ˆ®ƒ”¹   ˆ®„”¹   ˆ®…”¹   ˆ®†”¹   ˆ®‡”¹   ˆ®ˆ”¹   ˆ®‰”¹   ˆ®Š”¹   ˆ®‹”¹   ˆ®Œ”¹   ˆ®”¹   ˆ®Ž”¹   ˆ®”¹   ˆ®”¹   ˆ®‘”¹   ˆ®’”¹   ˆ®“”¹   ˆ®””¹   ˆ®•”¹   ˆ®–”º   ˆ®—”º   ˆ®˜”º   ˆ®™”º   ˆ®š”º   ˆ®›”º   ˆ®œ”º   ˆ®”º   ˆ®ž”º   ˆ®Ÿ”º   ˆ®               ò”º   ˆ®¢”º   ˆ®£”º   ˆ®¤”º   ˆ®¥”º   ˆ®¦”º   ˆ®§”º   ˆ®¨”º   ˆ®©”º   ˆ®ª”º   ˆ®«”º   ˆ®¬”º   ˆ®­”º   ˆ®®”º   ˆ®¯”º   ˆ®°”º   ˆ®±”º   ˆ®²”º   ˆ®³”º   ˆ®´”º   ˆ®µ”º   ˆ®¶”º   ˆ®·”º   ˆ®¸”º   ˆ®¹”º   ˆ®º”º   ˆ®»”º   ˆ®¼”º   ˆ®½”º   ˆ®¾”º   ˆ®¿”º   ˆ®À”º   ˆ®Á”º   ˆ®Â”º   ˆ®Ã”º   ˆ®Ä”º   ˆ®Å”º   ˆ®Æ”º   ˆ®Ç”º   ˆ®È”º   ˆ®É”º   ˆ®Ê”º   ˆ®Ë”º   ˆ®Ì”º   ˆ®Í”º   ˆ®Î”º   ˆ®Ï”º   ˆ®Ð”º   ˆ®Ñ”º   ˆ®Ò”º   ˆ®Ó”º   ˆ®Ô”º   ˆ®Õ”º   ˆ®Ö”º   ˆ®×”º   ˆ®Ø”º   ˆ®Ù”º   ˆ®Ú”º   ˆ®Û”º   ˆ®Ü”º   ˆ®Ý”º   ˆ®Þ”º   ˆ®ß”º   ˆ®à”º   ˆ®á”º   ˆ®â”»   ˆ®ã”»   ˆ®ä”»   ˆ®å”»   ˆ®æ”»   ˆ®ç”»   ˆ®è”»   ˆ®é”»   ˆ®ê”»   ˆ®ë”»   ˆ®ì”»   ˆ®í”»   ˆ®î”»   ˆ®ï”»   ˆ®ð”»   ˆ®ñ”»   ˆ®ò”»   ˆ®ó”»   ˆ®ô”»   ˆ®õ”»   ˆ®ö”»   ˆ®÷”»   ˆ®ø”»   ˆ®ù”»   ˆ®ú”¼   ˆ®û”¼   ˆ®ü”¼   ˆ®ý”¼   ˆ®þ”¼   ˆ®ÿ”¼   ˆ¯ ”¼   ˆ¯”¼   ˆ¯”¼   ˆ¯”¼   ˆ¯”¼   ˆ¯”¼   ˆ¯”¼   ˆ¯”¼   ˆ¯”¼   ˆ¯	”¼   ˆ¯
”¼   ˆ¯”¼   ˆ¯”¼   ˆ¯ ”¼   ˆ¯”¼   ˆ¯”¼   ˆ¯”¼   ˆ¯              ò”¼   ˆ¯”¼   ˆ¯”¼   ˆ¯”¼   ˆ¯”¼   ˆ¯”¼   ˆ¯”¼   ˆ¯”¼   ˆ¯”¼   ˆ¯”¼   ˆ¯”¼   ˆ¯”¼   ˆ¯”¼   ˆ¯”¼   ˆ¯ ”¼   ˆ¯!”¼   ˆ¯"”¼   ˆ¯#”¼   ˆ¯$”¼   ˆ¯%”¼   ˆ¯&”¼   ˆ¯'”¼   ˆ¯(”¼   ˆ¯)”¼   ˆ¯*”¼   ˆ¯+”¼   ˆ¯,”¼   ˆ¯-”¼   ˆ¯.”¼   ˆ¯/”¼   ˆ¯0”¼   ˆ¯1”¼   ˆ¯2”¼   ˆ¯3”¼   ˆ¯4”¼   ˆ¯5”¼   ˆ¯6”¼   ˆ¯7”¼   ˆ¯8”¼   ˆ¯9”¼   ˆ¯:”¼   ˆ¯;”¼   ˆ¯<”¼   ˆ¯=”¼   ˆ¯>”¼   ˆ¯?”¼   ˆ¯@”¼   ˆ¯A”¼   ˆ¯B”¼   ˆ¯C”¼   ˆ¯D”¼   ˆ¯E”¼   ˆ¯F”¼   ˆ¯G”¼   ˆ¯H”¼   ˆ¯I”¼   ˆ¯J”¼   ˆ¯K”¼   ˆ¯L”¼   ˆ¯M”¼   ˆ¯N”¼   ˆ¯O”¼   ˆ¯P”¼   ˆ¯Q”¼   ˆ¯R”¼   ˆ¯S”¼   ˆ¯T”¼   ˆ¯U”¼   ˆ¯V”¼   ˆ¯W”¼   ˆ¯X”¼   ˆ¯Y”¼   ˆ¯Z”¼   ˆ¯[”¼   ˆ¯\”¼   ˆ¯]”¼   ˆ¯^”¼   ˆ¯_”¼   ˆ¯`”¼   ˆ¯a”¼   ˆ¯b”¼   ˆ¯c”¼   ˆ¯d”¼   ˆ¯e”¼   ˆ¯f”¼   ˆ¯g”¼   ˆ¯h”¼   ˆ¯i”¼   ˆ¯j”¼   ˆ¯k”¼   ˆ¯l”¼   ˆ¯m”¼   ˆ¯n”¼   ˆ¯o”¼   ˆ¯p”¼   ˆ¯q”¼   ˆ¯r”¼   ˆ¯s”¼   ˆ¯t”¼   ˆ¯u”¼   ˆ¯v”¼   ˆ¯w”¼   ˆ¯x”¼   ˆ¯y”¼   ˆ¯z”¼   ˆ¯{”¼   ˆ¯|”¼   ˆ¯}”¼   ˆ¯~”¼   ˆ¯”¼   ˆ¯€”¼   ˆ¯”¼   ˆ¯‚_


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 17, 2008)

"Actually Its AUDIO over LAN, which is a bit more impressive. If the whole rig is ethernet connection including MIDI AND Audio, then its actually kind of cool. Alot like the Receptor. However latency will have to be commented on."

Yo KI, have you seen Vienna Ensemble 3? That's a proof of concept for audio- and MIDI-over-ethernet if I've ever seen one. Full delay compensation, low latency (1, 2, 3x the audio interface buffer) - they have it down.

But it's only for VSL (plus processing plug-ins, just not V.I.s).


----------



## KingIdiot (Oct 18, 2008)

Nick Batzdorf @ Fri Oct 17 said:


> "Actually Its AUDIO over LAN, which is a bit more impressive. If the whole rig is ethernet connection including MIDI AND Audio, then its actually kind of cool. Alot like the Receptor. However latency will have to be commented on."
> 
> Yo KI, have you seen Vienna Ensemble 3? That's a proof of concept for audio- and MIDI-over-ethernet if I've ever seen one. Full delay compensation, low latency (1, 2, 3x the audio interface buffer) - they have it down.
> 
> But it's only for VSL (plus processing plug-ins, just not V.I.s).




Impressive....


----------



## Ranietz (Nov 3, 2008)

The website got an update. Still no audiodemos.


----------



## chrisr (Nov 3, 2008)

Ranietz @ Mon Nov 03 said:


> The website got an update. Still no audiodemos.



STOP PRESS !!!!

There actually does seem to be one on this page!

http://www.audioimpressions.com/the%2Dbuzz/endorsements/kevin%2Dkiner/ (http://www.audioimpressions.com/the%2Db ... n%2Dkiner/)

(unsurprisingly...) It's a little vague as to whether these strings/orchestra are AI or not? (and there's a wicked buzz at 9 seconds...)

...but this COULD be it! - a first true demo?? If so, it's STUNNING. If not it's... just a live recording (avec buzz) or Mr Kiner's work... (lovely as that is)... and the wait continues.


----------



## choc0thrax (Nov 3, 2008)

That's samples...lol. And not stunning.


----------



## chrisr (Nov 3, 2008)

choc0thrax @ Mon Nov 03 said:


> That's samples...



Then my search for a strings library is over! :D


----------



## choc0thrax (Nov 3, 2008)

From the bottom of my heart I am happy for you! 8)


----------



## Jack Weaver (Nov 3, 2008)

I don't know what I'm listening to with this example - but it sounds pretty good. 

Pretty short, too.


----------



## Sovereign (Nov 3, 2008)

Sounds like string mush to me.


----------



## KingIdiot (Nov 3, 2008)

who the hell knows if thats even DVZ

either way, like some aspects of it, despise others.. like the mix


----------



## RiffWraith (Nov 3, 2008)

chrisr @ Mon Nov 03 said:


> STOP PRESS !!!!
> 
> There actually does seem to be one on this page!
> 
> http://www.audioimpressions.com/the%2Dbuzz/endorsements/kevin%2Dkiner/ (http://www.audioimpressions.com/the%2Db ... n%2Dkiner/)



Very UNimpressed. It doesn't sound bad, but I have heard better with GOS.


----------



## synthetic (Nov 3, 2008)

OK, listened again on my tuned home system and I'm less impressed now. Strange legato blip with every note. Thin midrange. Nice vibrato on that one note though, that's what caught my ear the first time.


----------



## José Herring (Nov 3, 2008)

Sounds very nice to me. They've come a long way.

Jose


----------



## caseyjames (Nov 4, 2008)

Does it bother anyone that the nuances of style, orchestration and harmony are being stamped out in the name of mass production quantity for "busy" composers who don't have time for anything but fat handed chord progressions on a string pad? 

It feels like were getting down to chugging DMZ powerchords along to symphobia's "Mega Monster Orchestral Death Hit Multi 4".

Why have we all of a sudden embraced the band in the box approach to content and style?

I'm seeing a lot of boring canned music on the horizon.

For the sake of music, give your money to the clever folks at wallander, synful and garritan. They are all working on tools that speed up production without sacrificing quality or individual character.


----------

