# Audio Modeling vs Sample Modeling Strings Comparison.



## aisch1212 (Apr 20, 2021)

Hello. It is my first post.

From 2 years ago, I've been purchasing and practicing most advanced virtual-acoustic instruments of this era: Audio Modeling SWAM series and Sample Modeling products. I've even developed my own breath controller and midi controllers to maximize playability of these miracle instruments. These programs are both extremely realistic and expressive compared to other conventional VSTis, which are still excellent.

As for the virtual string instrument, however, even with hybrid or physical modeling tech, realism and naturalness is a high goal that can't be easily accomplished. It requires delicate approaches and tons of amount of time to have it get used to utilize.

I'm still practicing it and studying how to educe its great potential to achieve the level of alternate acoustic musical instrument.

I've made a video as an exemplary comparison for AM and SM instruments.

Which one do you think is most realistic?

If you want to share more examples, I'd be very happy to here them. If you've got only one of two companies' product, it'd be also glad to see the result. I can make an counter example and post it by using the other company's product you don't have.


----------



## tabulius (Apr 20, 2021)

Great work! Both of them sound pretty good, but in these examples, I liked the SM a bit more. Was this SWAM 3.0? Maybe with more micro tweaking AM would have sounded even better, but both of them get the job done imo. So why not get both?


----------



## I like music (Apr 20, 2021)

aisch1212 said:


> Hello. It is my first post.
> 
> From 2 years ago, I've been purchasing and practicing most advanced virtual-acoustic instruments of this era: Audio Modeling SWAM series and Sample Modeling products. I've even developed my own breath controller and midi controllers to maximize playability of these miracle instruments. These programs are both extremely realistic and expressive compared to other conventional VSTis, which are still excellent.
> 
> ...



Wonderful work. The content I come here for. I'd love to know what CC massaging you did here for your results. Are you open to sharing a MIDI file so I can import and check my SM strings and see what you did? No problem if not!

Mostly it was hard to distinguish. There were parts where the transitions and attacks in AM were crisper and sounded better. The only place where the instruments fell a bit where on the slides/bends.

Otherwise, this is a reminder of how wonderful these instruments are, especially when care and attention is given to them. Very nice job!!!

Also, can you give me some information please on how you placed the SM ones in space?

Oh, one final bit ... the cello from SM still suffers a bit with a metallic tone especially in the higher dynamics.

Otherwise, very cool stuff mate. Keep going. I sometimes wonder why people bother with the solo strings instruments from the big developers which often come across as an afterthought with very little control over expression (OK I do understand why, but personal preference for me would be AM and SM over those other ones).

Wish I hadn't sold my AM strings. Money was tight so had to do it but this is a nice reminder to grab these when I can afford them.

EDIT: I'd suggest adding a poll category "I can't decide which one is better" because right now, I can't.


----------



## CT (Apr 20, 2021)

SM for the violin and viola, AM for the cello.


----------



## DANIELE (Apr 20, 2021)

aisch1212 said:


> Hello. It is my first post.
> 
> From 2 years ago, I've been purchasing and practicing most advanced virtual-acoustic instruments of this era: Audio Modeling SWAM series and Sample Modeling products. I've even developed my own breath controller and midi controllers to maximize playability of these miracle instruments. These programs are both extremely realistic and expressive compared to other conventional VSTis, which are still excellent.
> 
> ...



Hard comparison but I must say that SM sounds better here even if I liked AM too.

Great use of overtones, I always forgot to use a little touch of them when I add solo lines in my compositions.

Same question: did you use AM Strings V3 or v2?

I'd like to see other comparison, thank you so much for this.


----------



## aisch1212 (Apr 20, 2021)

tabulius said:


> Great work! Both of them sound pretty good, but in these examples, I liked the SM a bit more. Was this SWAM 3.0? Maybe with more micro tweaking AM would have sounded even better, but both of them get the job done imo. So why not get both?


Thank you. And Yes. before I've made the video, I'd upgraded my SWAM strings v2 to v3 recently. 3.0.0 was unusable in Reaper, but new 3.0.1 is quiet functional. I agree with your recommendation of adjusting the micro tuning. I think AM needs more sharpness of high frequency in the video. Besides, the video examples are mainly biased on the classical performance. In my opinion, AM's strength's highlighted when it comes to electronic and pop music, or even experimental ones.




I like music said:


> Wonderful work. The content I come here for. I'd love to know what CC massaging you did here for your results. Are you open to sharing a MIDI file so I can import and check my SM strings and see what you did? No problem if not!
> 
> Mostly it was hard to distinguish. There were parts where the transitions and attacks in AM were crisper and sounded better. The only place where the instruments fell a bit where on the slides/bends.
> 
> ...



Thanks you for sharing great insights of yours.
Here is my MIDI file. It's the first time for me to export raw midi, so if there are any problems in it, just let me know.

CC2 is expression, CC1 is vibrato intensity, CC21 is vibrato rate, CC22 is overtone for SM. pitch bend and foot pedal are also used. I've linked bow pressure(Only for AM) to expression(CC2) with some delay with reaper plugins so it is not written in midi file.

I've used plugins to give some attack release CC offset so it is not also written in the file. But the difference made by being without them is very minor and easily compensated.

When I set up my SM and AM, all the internal reverb and IR have been disabled. For SM, only distance of 12 has been applied in the internal virtual stage setting. 
I've used Seventh Heaven to apply IR and a little amount of reverb for each individual instruments. Finally, I've set main reverb(Cinematic Room) through master mix track. Even though AM reverb is somewhat... unpleasant to here, SM reverb is quiet good except for it is a kind of muddy stuff. When it comes to SM, You don't necessarily need to use external reverb. It's a personal preference.

I don't think my setting is an optimal option. Unlike the situation shown in the video, when quartet or ensemble follows a solo instrument, it's okay to have solo one a little bit muddy and IR-friendly to have all the music in a harmony.

I'll try to fix some problems with SM cello with applying EQ. I've disabled all the fabfilter stuffs to make the comparison as fair as possible. Now the some insufficiency with SM cello sound is quiet noticeable!


----------



## aisch1212 (Apr 20, 2021)

DANIELE said:


> Hard comparison but I must say that SM sounds better here even if I liked AM too.
> 
> Great use of overtones, I always forgot to use a little touch of them when I add solo lines in my compositions.
> 
> ...


It is AM SWAM strings V3.0.1

I made a hand-grab device with a gyro sensor(for vibrato) and buttons on it. With a sticky bend, it attaches to left hand without grabbing it. When I intend to, I can press overtone button instantly with my thumb.


----------



## cygnusdei (Apr 20, 2021)

The SM sounds great, although in the examples there are curious artifacts where harmonics are triggered although the passages are nowhere near high register. To me the AM sounds hollow, even downright silly in places, evoking the memory of the toy Casio keyboard on 'violin'.

I'd be interested in hearing how trills would fare in modeled samples, as they are probably one of the weakest aspects of recorded samples.


----------



## DANIELE (Apr 20, 2021)

aisch1212 said:


> It is AM SWAM strings V3.0.1
> 
> I made a hand-grab device with a gyro sensor(for vibrato) and buttons on it. With a sticky bend, it attaches to left hand without grabbing it. When I intend to, I can press overtone button instantly with my thumb.


I'd like to build my own midi device in the future, I'd like to build mt own breath controller, maybe using hi-res midi, since I'm an engineer I think I could have the skills to do it. Did you followed some sort of guide, instructions etc...? Where did you buy the components? How you did for the software to control the device?

Could you post some pictures of the devices you built?

About the instruments maybe the sound of AM here is a little less crisp of SM ones.


----------



## DANIELE (Apr 20, 2021)

cygnusdei said:


> The SM sounds great, although in the examples there are curious artifacts where harmonics are triggered although the passages are nowhere near high register. To me the AM sounds hollow, even downright silly in places, evoking the memory of the toy Casio keyboard on 'violin'.


I'm playing with AM Strings V3 this days and I must say it is very good, I'm still in the learning curve time where I experiment with the instrument to understand how to get the best from it (and it includes the space positioning) but I'm already pretty happy with the results, there are A LOT of parameters to touch, this is where you can make the instruments shine.


----------



## Fa (Apr 20, 2021)

I'm not 100% objective... I've been beta tester and demo-maker for both the companies, and I'm a good friend of both the developers, but...

In my humble opinion we are in front of the best solo strings on the market.

Both are excellent for playability, and they both offer a way for creating real strings technics phrasing, almost impossible with traditional sample libraries.

Still I've a clear preference for the sound of SampleModeling, that has a texture and body definitely closer to the real instruments (not surprising, because it's based on real samples of real instruments). 

It's impressive how smooth and flexible can be the AM physical modelling synth, that unfortunately is still missing some of the stochastic complexity of the real strings/bows, sounding somehow artificial (it's more evident in the Viola, as in some sustain and slides of Violin and Cello as well).

Now looking forward to the upcoming SampleModeling update, that is expected to improve sound and texture... let's see.


----------



## doctoremmet (Apr 20, 2021)

@aisch1212 I’m stunned. Great playing. True mastery of both instruments. Fantastic sounding space / reverb. Very high quality production values for the video. And you built your own hand-held MIDI controller? 

This can only mean one thing:






(I voted SM based on a gut feeling that the timbre was ever so slightly more pleasing to my ears, but honestly it was a close call)


----------



## aisch1212 (Apr 20, 2021)

cygnusdei said:


> The SM sounds great, although in the examples there are curious artifacts where harmonics are triggered although the passages are nowhere near high register. To me the AM sounds hollow, even downright silly in places, evoking the memory of the toy Casio keyboard on 'violin'.


Your choice of word for AM is both aggressive and penetrative! haha
Even though I'm possessed of SWAM string over a year, It is quiet tricky to use it. There are more of SWAM string practices in my youtube channel. You can check more about SWAM if you like.

I guess harmonic-like artifacts are due to the overuse of overtone when I play SM. Looks like I should be more careful when using overtones.




DANIELE said:


> I'd like to build my own midi device in the future, I'd like to build mt own breath controller, maybe using hi-res midi, since I'm an engineer I think I could have the skills to do it. Did you followed some sort of guide, instructions etc...? Where did you buy the components? How you did for the software to control the device?
> 
> Could you post some pictures of the devices you built?
> 
> About the instruments maybe the sound of AM here is a little less crisp of SM ones.



Hello. I'm just a visual art student with game software engineering degree. I'm sure it would be no problem for a real engineer like you.

I made my custom BC to support Hi-Res functionality with latency of less than 2~3 ms. I bought microprocessors equipped with cortex m0+ and plug-in-play USB support. All the sensors and processors were not very expensive.(less than 60$ total) I used MPXV7002~7007 sensor as a breath sensor and bunch of capacitors. I've used arduino IDE and C++ for programming it. 

Besides, I'm South Korean, which means cheap semiconductors manufactured in China can be shipped in real quick... Or should I say "used to shipped in real quick". All hail to Covid-19. It presents very easygoing, slow-going, mandatory no-going life style to us all. Even semiconductors keep quarantine in their homeland. I managed to get find some stock components then.

Here are some pictures and blueprint captures for my devices. 

I'd like to happily see other guys making DIY midi stuffs. There were no exact instructions for making it. It costs months to find out proper way of doing it. If there is anything I can help you with, please reply sometimes.









[01] Breath Controller prototype - V1















[02] Breath Controller prototype - V2


----------



## doctoremmet (Apr 20, 2021)

(I could also have made a separate award for “best first VI-Control post ever”)


----------



## doctoremmet (Apr 20, 2021)

I subscribed to your YT channel.


----------



## did (Apr 20, 2021)

SM are here for me better : best definition, a bit more realistic, above all with portamentos.


----------



## I like music (Apr 20, 2021)

aisch1212 said:


> Thank you. And Yes. before I've made the video, I'd upgraded my SWAM strings v2 to v3 recently. 3.0.0 was unusable in Reaper, but new 3.0.1 is quiet functional. I agree with your recommendation of adjusting the micro tuning. I think AM needs more sharpness of high frequency in the video. Besides, the video examples are mainly biased on the classical performance. In my opinion, AM's strength's highlighted when it comes to electronic and pop music, or even experimental ones.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thank you so much!!! Subscribed.


----------



## Markrs (Apr 20, 2021)

Also subscribed, great work


----------



## aisch1212 (Apr 20, 2021)

Fa said:


> Now looking forward to the upcoming SampleModeling update, that is expected to improve sound and texture... let's see.


As SM is run by very few people, an update seems to be slow. I wouldn't be more happier than to see any further progress for SM, including future woodwinds products, if possible.



doctoremmet said:


> @aisch1212 I’m stunned. Great playing. True mastery of both instruments. Fantastic sounding space / reverb. Very high quality production values for the video. And you built your own hand-held MIDI controller?
> 
> This can only mean one thing:
> 
> ...


Thanks you for presenting me a virtual prize for the virtual performance of virtual instruments!

You've mentioned an emotional aspect of playing these VSTi. I think most of non-sample VSTi are missing that point in the aspect of marketing strategy.

And I've just noticed how much my community name is so stupid like "aisch1212"! I gotta change it for sure.


----------



## Markrs (Apr 20, 2021)

aisch1212 said:


> And I've just noticed how much my community name is so stupid like "aisch1212"! I gotta change it for sure.


Happily there is a thread where you can request for it to be changed






Please change my username


Well imo Nimrod7 or any kind of Nimrod is just so memorable,are you sure? thanks! I will let it be then!! :D




vi-control.net


----------



## doctoremmet (Apr 20, 2021)

aisch1212 said:


> You've mentioned an emotional aspect of playing these VSTi. I think most of non-sample VSTi are missing that point in the aspect of marketing strategy.


You may have a very valid point there.

I have learned a lot about physically modelled instruments like SM and AM by reading up on some of the threads on here, by the likes of (in my eyes) experts, like @Saxer @David Cuny and @lychee (Friktion guru!) - and I'm sure I am forgetting some other pioneers in this field.

What I have gathered from their demos and sound explorations (that they've shared here) is that these instruments' success (or maybe more accurately put: "effectiveness") lies in the way in which a true musician is able to emote with them, rather than in the perceived "realism" of the sound, i.e. the extent to which they are able to precisely emulate real stringed instruments. So on the one hand I totally get certain criticisms people may have ("uncanny valley" type sound, "just not the real deal', synthy), and on the other hand some of the most astounding demos I have heard in the past year or so were made with PM instruments rather than samples. And I suspect that has a lot to do with the sheer amount of expressiveness that lies hidden beneath those (quite frankly) daunting looking user interfaces! 

Oh, and honestly? How many people are really able to get the most out of their sampled virtual instruments? It seems I mostly excel in acquiring them, lol.


----------



## doctoremmet (Apr 20, 2021)

Markrs said:


> Happily there is a thread where you can request for it to be changed
> 
> 
> 
> ...


May I suggest: Physical (Role) Model


----------



## nolotrippen (Apr 20, 2021)

aisch1212 said:


> Hello. It is my first post.
> 
> From 2 years ago, I've been purchasing and practicing most advanced virtual-acoustic instruments of this era: Audio Modeling SWAM series and Sample Modeling products. I've even developed my own breath controller and midi controllers to maximize playability of these miracle instruments. These programs are both extremely realistic and expressive compared to other conventional VSTis, which are still excellent.
> 
> ...



Thanks. Only took about 10 seconds of AM to decide on SM


----------



## Ziffles (Apr 20, 2021)

Very nice demo. The Sample Modeling solo strings sound better than I thought they would (I've only played around with the ensemble patches so far). I just wish both companies would figure out how to shake off that weird plastic-y sound of their cellos. AM is closer in that regard, but still a ways off.


----------



## aisch1212 (Apr 22, 2021)

cygnusdei said:


> I'd be interested in hearing how trills would fare in modeled samples, as they are probably one of the weakest aspects of recorded samples.






Here is a short comparison of virtual violin performance utilizing some trills in a musical context.


----------



## cygnusdei (Apr 22, 2021)

aisch1212 said:


> Here is a short comparison of virtual violin performance utilizing some trills in a musical context.



Kudos for doing this, you are a gentleman and a scholar . To me in the trills the SM has clippings/artifacts and the AM sounds natural.


----------



## Fa (Apr 22, 2021)

cygnusdei said:


> Kudos for doing this, you are a gentleman and a scholar . To me in the trills the SM has clippings/artifacts and the AM sounds natural.


I have a slightly different feeling... the AM sound more smooth/connected but there is a strange (kind of sinusoid effect) sound modulation far from natural.

In SM I hear a bit too much of the finger knocks, and in the AM not enough...

To be fair, playing trills with AM is easier, and the AM is very responsive to player style, and easy to control. 

To make SM trills sound natural by the way it's requested a bit of controllers editing (attack speed and velocity modulation) not so easy with just keyboard and breath-controller, anyway well done if it's live performance.


----------



## cygnusdei (Apr 22, 2021)

doctoremmet said:


> You may have a very valid point there.
> 
> I have learned a lot about physically modelled instruments like SM and AM by reading up on some of the threads on here, by the likes of (in my eyes) experts, like @Saxer @David Cuny and @lychee (Friktion guru!) - and I'm sure I am forgetting some other pioneers in this field.
> 
> ...


I'm sure it's been done before, but the only way to know for sure would be to get a PM guy and a sample guy square off mocking up the same piece. Something simple yet naturally allows sensitive expression like Elgar's Salut d'Amour comes to mind.


----------



## doctoremmet (Apr 22, 2021)

It may depend on age as well? I have always been a big Suzanne Ciani fan and read up on everything she did in Keyboard Magazine back in the eighties. She was always considered a sound designer and worked with (Buchla) synths and a Synclavier, but was doing sound design mostly with synthesis. I recall a story about an advertising agency that needed her to do “the sound of seagull wings with pingpong balls taped to it” 

The point being, sound design was a thing way before sampling became commonplace. Also, I definitely consider geniuses like Emptyvessel and Devine sound designers. They work with samplers but are also doing stuff “synth only”.


----------



## doctoremmet (Apr 22, 2021)

3:35 Google Daydream VR platform sound design (a platform which in true Google fashion was killed after only a few years but that’s beside the point)


----------



## Fa (Apr 23, 2021)

doctoremmet said:


> It may depend on age as well? I have always been a big Suzanne Ciani fan and read up on everything she did in Keyboard Magazine back in the eighties. She was always considered a sound designer and worked with (Buchla) synths and a Synclavier, but was soing sound design mostly with synthesis. I recall a story about an advertising agency that needed her to do “the sound of seagull wings with pingpong balls taped to it”
> 
> The point being, sound design was a thing way before sampling became commonplace. Also, I definitely consider geniuses like Emptyvessel and Devine sound designers. They work with samplers but are also doing stuff “synth only”.


LOL well age helps to remember things that today appear and sound so weird or odd, just because we are focusing on the technical limitations. When we talk about music, music is made out of elegance and emotions, and you may get some elegance from video-game sound chips of the 80's and deep emotion out of a Moog synth... don't you?  

Here I would say we talk about scope instead: it's the usual double sided point about virtual-reality. What's the scope of rendering the imperfection of the skin, or the tree wood texture with computer graphics?... you may just go out and take pictures of the real thing... don't you?

So if you have an application for it (e.g. mock-up before the real thing is built or created, and/or artistic representation of something strongly inspired by nature, but about not affordable real stuff...) well it makes sense.

A synth as a cartoonish picture can be more emotional and dense of art than a sampled sound or photorealistic rendering picture... but they are a different thing with a different scope. That's the point.


----------



## doctoremmet (Apr 23, 2021)

Fa said:


> A synth as a cartoonish picture can be more emotional and dense of art than a sampled sound or photorealistic rendering picture... but they are a different thing with a different scope. That's the point.


I get your point and wholeheartedly agree


----------



## Fa (Apr 23, 2021)

doctoremmet said:


> I get your point and wholeheartedly agree


As I did with yours and I do: I think you touched in several comments a pretty good and in my opinion, key point:
a musical instrument has in the expression and emotional power at least the same interest and importance than the realism.

What we will never forgive are unreal and inexpressive libraries, and they are a few. They exist just because of sales and marketing, but sooner or later their own user base will force them to change or disappear


----------



## HCMarkus (Apr 26, 2021)

I am liking the SM versions overall a tad more than the AM versions; kudos to the OP for a wonderful job with both, and for taking the time to post the video.

Just wondering if my money is better spent on upgrading AM from V2 to v3 or investing $$$ in the SM products.... I've enjoyed working with AM V2 but feel the SM representations have a richness the AM versions lack.


----------



## aisch1212 (Apr 26, 2021)

HCMarkus said:


> Just wondering if my money is better spent on upgrading AM from V2 to v3 or investing $$$ in the SM products.... I've enjoyed working with AM V2 but feel the SM representations have a richness the AM versions lack.


AM v3 does not show significant improvements compared to previous V2 except for increased convenience of adjusting its functionality like CC graph editing. V3 makes some previous features handy but still is SWAM.

If what you are looking for is a new kind of sound of strings, having Sample Modeling'd be a good choice.


----------



## Tralen (Apr 26, 2021)

HCMarkus said:


> I am liking the SM versions overall a tad more than the AM versions; kudos to the OP for a wonderful job with both, and for taking the time to post the video.
> 
> Just wondering if my money is better spent on upgrading AM from V2 to v3 or investing $$$ in the SM products.... I've enjoyed working with AM V2 but feel the SM representations have a richness the AM versions lack.


The problem I see with Sample Modeling, and that has prevented me from buying their products, is that there appears to be simply no progression. I can't find information about new instruments or any meaningful update, so I worry about purchasing a dead product.

The Horn & Tuba update to version 3 was in 2015. I don't know if there was any update since then, the site doesn't make it clear. The Trumpet and Trombone are even older.

I worry about investing in the Strings library for this reason, even though it is a new library.


----------



## HCMarkus (Apr 26, 2021)

Tralen said:


> The problem I see with Sample Modeling, and that has prevented me from buying their products, is that there appears to be simply no progression. I can't find information about new instruments or any meaningful update, so I worry about purchasing a dead product.
> 
> The Horn & Tuba update to version 3 was in 2015. I don't know if there was any update since then, the site doesn't make it clear. The Trumpet and Trombone are even older.
> 
> I worry about investing in the Strings library for this reason, even though it is a new library.


At this point, I am going to hold off on going into any new VIs until the Apple Silicon hurdle is cleared. I am planning to go with a new MacBook Air with MainStage for my live work, and don't want to pour more money down the VI hole until I know that Apple Silicon compatibility is something I get in return.


----------



## Toecutter (Apr 26, 2021)

Judging the sound only, I find SM to have more body and a pleasant tone. Both still sound very fake to my ears, nothing to do with your programming, just the nature of modeled strings.


----------



## Tralen (Apr 26, 2021)

HCMarkus said:


> At this point, I am going to hold off on going into any new VIs until the Apple Silicon hurdle is cleared. I am planning to go with a new MacBook Air with MainStage for my live work, and don't want to pour more money down the VI hole until I know that Apple Silicon compatibility is something I get in return.


By waiting, you might get a chance of comparing the upcoming Aaron Venture's Infinite Strings as well. I've decided to buy his whole collection, the brass and woodwinds already convinced me, just waiting for the strings.


----------



## Fa (Apr 27, 2021)

Toecutter said:


> Judging the sound only, I find SM to have more body and a pleasant tone. Both still sound very fake to my ears, nothing to do with your programming, just the nature of modeled strings.


It's an interesting point of view, but I'm not sure if I get it right:

- I assume you know that "modeled" is just a naming coincidence (the guys creating AudioModeling being "copying" a bit of the previous company name) and not a technology or sound designator. The 2 instruments have almost nothing in common, a part for being really playable in real-time with similar controllers.

- I'm wondering if there is any product you think is producing a better/more-real sound during a phrase: I can agree with you only if we take a still and disconnected sustain or short sample. I'm not aware of any product able of creating anything more realistic than a Samplemodeling solo string when it comes to a phrase. Are you?


----------



## Fa (Apr 27, 2021)

Tralen said:


> The problem I see with Sample Modeling, and that has prevented me from buying their products, is that there appears to be simply no progression. I can't find information about new instruments or any meaningful update, so I worry about purchasing a dead product.
> 
> The Horn & Tuba update to version 3 was in 2015. I don't know if there was any update since then, the site doesn't make it clear. The Trumpet and Trombone are even older.
> 
> I worry about investing in the Strings library for this reason, even though it is a new library.


Being a beta tester and demo maker for SampleModeling for years and in close touch with the developers I can reassure that your conclusions are based on misunderstandings:

- SampleModeling was keeping updated the Brass product line for years, and then didn't stop working: they supported the development of the whole sax and woodwinds SWAM product line of Stefano Lucato, as the early SWAM strings.

- when SWAM developers left the company and founded the new one (AudioModeling), Samplemodeling didn't stop supporting the existing product line, and moved to develope the actual Strings family, keeping it continuously updated in the last 2 years, and close to deliver a new major update for it.

Then there is no reason for any worry, even if the deeply innovative and science based technology of the small company drives to some longer development time, compared to the massive productivity of big players populating the market with pretty cloned and traditional products, good or bad you may consider them.


----------



## muziksculp (Apr 27, 2021)

Hi @Fa,

I'm curious why Sample Modeling uses Kontakt, instead of developing their own PM Engine ? 

Thanks.


----------



## Tralen (Apr 27, 2021)

Fa said:


> Being a beta tester and demo maker for SampleModeling for years and in close touch with the developers I can reassure that your conclusions are based on misunderstandings:
> 
> - SampleModeling was keeping updated the Brass product line for years, and then didn't stop working: they supported the development of the whole sax and woodwinds SWAM product line of Stefano Lucato, as the early SWAM strings.
> 
> ...


These are not conclusions, simply observations. If not for your post, I would have no idea of the continuous development of the older libraries, it is simply not clear from their website. Even the announcement section in their own forum says nothing about updates.

I will simply not rely on third party commentary to judge if their product line is active or not. That is simply bad communication on their part.

And I don't care for the big players either, that is why I'm going for Aaron Venture.


----------



## Fa (Apr 27, 2021)

Tralen said:


> These are not conclusions, simply observations. If not for your post, I would have no idea of the continuous development of the older libraries, it is simply not clear from their website. Even the announcement section in their own forum says nothing about updates.
> 
> I will simply not rely on third party commentary to judge if their product line is active or not. That is simply bad communication on their part.
> 
> And I don't care for the big players either, that is why I'm going for Aaron Venture.


I respect your opinion of course, and I understand your point, a part for one side:
- yes the web site has been neglected, and it's not the main focus of the company owners (probably underestimating the effect of their decision).

- no, if you refer to my report, it's not my (being 3rd party) commentary, but just facts and history, anybody following the company or active in the community had the chance of watching. SWAM development and distribution was main topic for years. Just legal agreements of separation forced to remove the track of it. But there is no gap between the last brass and the actual strings, it was just filled by SWAM.

I appreciate your preference, being also mine. Very often small developers can do better, at least in passion and care, as customer care.


----------



## Fa (Apr 27, 2021)

muziksculp said:


> Hi @Fa,
> 
> I'm curious why Sample Modeling uses Kontakt, instead of developing their own PM Engine ?
> 
> Thanks.


I had for ever the same curiosity. There is space for subjective point of view, and it's probably a matter of priorities. The explanation I got was: the core of SampleModeling technology was tailor made around the Kontakt sampler and the advanced Kontakt scripting ability. The AI scripts of SM are so big and so complex they can't easily be transported into a player, so even when the company associates developed SWAM, still the core of SM technologies had to stay on Kontakt.

Now the investment for a new player with the same scripting capacity of Kontakt and a compatible audio engine, is probably too big to be payed back by the small business (it's challenging even for companies as big as EastWest, most of the other players are not more than sample-playback + GUI, with just essential and basic scripts, VSL had probably the only successfully engineered players, and still had slightly limited scripting, etc.)


----------



## Tralen (Apr 27, 2021)

Fa said:


> I respect your opinion of course, and I understand your point, a part for one side:
> - yes the web site has been neglected, and it's not the main focus of the company owners (probably underestimating the effect of their decision).
> 
> - no, if you refer to my report, it's not my (being 3rd party) commentary, but just facts and history, anybody following the company or active in the community had the chance of watching. SWAM development and distribution was main topic for years. Just legal agreements of separation forced to remove the track of it. But there is no gap between the last brass and the actual strings, it was just filled by SWAM.
> ...


I appreciate your input and the information about the company, I hope I didn't sound confrontational.

I had the opportunity of playing Sample Modeling instruments a long time ago and was a bit disheartened that they appeared to be in the same state.

A simple changelog in the website would have made things much clearer.


----------



## muziksculp (Apr 27, 2021)

Fa said:


> The AI scripts of SM are so big and so complex they can't easily be transported into a player, so even when the company associates developed SWAM, still the core of SM technologies had to stay on Kontakt.


Interesting, but I'm guessing this won't be an issue if they had the funds, and initiative to develop their own player, that will allow them to use their complex, and big scripts/programs using it, instead of Kontakt. 

Their reliance on Kontakt for developing a complex PM engine might not be giving them the optimal product, especially for PM Instruments, that could be so much better in terms of user interaction, GUI design, and other details. 

As to their Website, yes, I think it does need a bit of a facelift, and more TLC. 

Looking forward to the next big update for their Solo & Ens. Strings. and hopefully their Solo Woodwinds in the future. 

Thanks.


----------



## Fa (Apr 27, 2021)

muziksculp said:


> Interesting, but I'm guessing this won't be an issue if they had the funds, and initiative to develop their own player, that will allow them to use their complex, and big scripts/programs using it, instead of Kontakt.
> 
> Their reliance on Kontakt for developing a complex PM engine might not be giving them the optimal product, especially for PM Instruments, that could be so much better in terms of user interaction, GUI design, and other details.
> 
> ...


I share your hope, with some positive attitude, since I had the chance of testing some prototypes.

But about PM, if it's standing for Physical Modelling, then yes Kontakt is not a platform, but PM is not the target of SampleModeling:

- Physical Modelling is a synth technology, and Kontakt is a sample player. For proper implementation of physical modelling SWAM has been created, and still is the core technology of AudioModeling product line.

- Samplemodeling technologies are actually based on samples, not synthesis. The role of physics and psychoacoustic in SM is to manipulate sample playback in real time (like almost all the other sample players try to do) but assisted by a sophisticated AI engine aimed to mimic nuances and acoustic behaviour of the instrument, interacting with the musical context, thanks to the real time analysis of the combination of expressive input by human player, or the programmed set of controllers in a sequence.


----------



## HCMarkus (Apr 29, 2021)

Fa said:


> - I'm wondering if there is any product you think is producing a better/more-real sound during a phrase: I can agree with you only if we take a still and disconnected sustain or short sample. I'm not aware of any product able of creating anything more realistic than a Samplemodeling solo string when it comes to a phrase. Are you?


That is exactly why, despite their shortcomings, I love my AudioModeling Strings. I just play the instrument... no keyswitching. Regardless of the articulation I seek, it is available via my keyboard, aftertouch and the TECcontrol breath controller. I lose myself in the performance. and simply make music.


----------



## aisch1212 (May 2, 2021)

cygnusdei said:


> I'm sure it's been done before, but the only way to know for sure would be to get a PM guy and a sample guy square off mocking up the same piece. Something simple yet naturally allows sensitive expression like Elgar's Salut d'Amour comes to mind.





It took so long! Here is Edward Elgar's Salut d'Amour Op.12, played in real-time with Sample Modeling Violin Solo. I've practiced this score for a week to record. It was for my GF's birthday.

I wish to see other performances or MIDI mock-ups made with sample libraries.


----------



## ludwig66661 (May 3, 2021)

aisch1212 said:


> I wish to see other performances or MIDI mock-ups made with sample libraries.


Hello!

here a mock-up of this beautiful old piece “Marche pour la cérémonie des Turcs” by Jean-Baptiste Lully made a few days ago with AM strings, woodwind and brass 
(The arrangement is mine)



I would appreciate any comments/ideas to improve

cheers


----------



## muziksculp (May 3, 2021)

ludwig66661 said:


> Hello!
> 
> here a mock-up of this beautiful old piece “Marche pour la cérémonie des Turcs” by Jean-Baptiste Lully made a few days ago with AM strings, woodwind and brass
> (The arrangement is mine)
> ...



Hi @ludwig66661 ,

Thanks for sharing your demo. Well Done, Bravo ! Also Welcome to VI-C Forum. I just noticed this is your first post here. Enjoy the Forum. 

I think the tempo you are playing this piece is too slow, it is played faster than that.

How many instances of the solo vlns, celli, ..etc. for each section did you use to get this ensemble sound ?

Did you record the audio from your monitors via another device ? it sounds like that. Kind of lost the details, and there is not much depth in the mix. or did you just export the audio from your daw, and added it to the video ?

Here is a mix you can compare it to. Listen to how much more details you hear, and depth. that is missing in your demo. That would be the area I would try to improve, including the tempo.

Cheers,
Muziksculp


----------



## muziksculp (May 3, 2021)

aisch1212 said:


> It took so long! Here is Edward Elgar's Salut d'Amour Op.12, played in real-time with Sample Modeling Violin Solo. I've practiced this score for a week to record. It was for my GF's birthday.
> 
> I wish to see other performances or MIDI mock-ups made with sample libraries.



Hi @aisch1212 ,

This is beautifully performed, and it sounds awesome. 

The timbre, and control is superb. It was worth your time practicing it. That's one reason it sounds so realistic, pleasing to listen to. 

Bravo.  

Thanks for sharing it with us, what an emotional piece. 

Cheers,
Muziksculp


----------



## aisch1212 (May 3, 2021)

ludwig66661 said:


> Hello!
> 
> here a mock-up of this beautiful old piece “Marche pour la cérémonie des Turcs” by Jean-Baptiste Lully made a few days ago with AM strings, woodwind and brass
> (The arrangement is mine)
> ...



Thanks you for sharing your work!
It's glad to see other wonderful performance.

I think the ensemble of SWAM shows some phasing, which often appears when play multiple SWAM simultaneously. How about adding more delay and humanization on CC values and timing?

As @muziksculp have mentioned, It seems in need of adding more speed on the current slow tempo, which leads to the lack of various articulations on original music.

I'm looking forward to see more of your works! As I'm learning VSTs not for so long, I'm very happy to experience other guys like you doing their musical outputs.


----------



## cygnusdei (May 6, 2021)

aisch1212 said:


> It took so long! Here is Edward Elgar's Salut d'Amour Op.12, played in real-time with Sample Modeling Violin Solo. I've practiced this score for a week to record. It was for my GF's birthday.
> 
> I wish to see other performances or MIDI mock-ups made with sample libraries.



Well, I'd like to take a stab at it with sample library. So in the interest of keeping to current topic instead of digging out an old thread later, attached is a preview now (sans accompaniment), but it will take awhile until I can finish - messing around with solo violin is kind of new to me after all! This is mostly to satisfy my own curiosity whether it can sound halfway decent. I'll probably post on the Composition board when it comes to it (and I probably won't listen to your performance until after).


----------



## aisch1212 (May 7, 2021)

cygnusdei said:


> Well, I'd like to take a stab at it with sample library. So in the interest of keeping to current topic instead of digging out an old thread later, attached is a preview now (sans accompaniment), but it will take awhile until I can finish - messing around with solo violin is kind of new to me after all! This is mostly to satisfy my own curiosity whether it can sound halfway decent. I'll probably post on the Composition board when it comes to it (and I probably won't listen to your performance until after).


I'm looking forwars to listen your work! It is glad that someone tries solo string score with virtual instrument.

As you'd not be likely to listen me playing elgar's piece until you complete yours, I wanna inform you that I'd used a recored piano accompaniment. A link to the piano sound is wirtten in my youtube video.

Good luck with your efforts! And let me know if it's done, should you want to.


----------



## sctaylorcan (May 12, 2021)

aisch1212 said:


> I'm looking forwars to listen your work! It is glad that someone tries solo string score with virtual instrument.
> 
> As you'd not be likely to listen me playing elgar's piece until you complete yours, I wanna inform you that I'd used a recored piano accompaniment. A link to the piano sound is wirtten in my youtube video.
> 
> Good luck with your efforts! And let me know if it's done, should you want to.


I'm late to this thread, but thank-you for both the original comparison video (loved the spinning instrument indicator) and for the Elgar piece -- I recently got SM strings too and you've inspired me to pull down the same accompaniment and see what I can do using just my Leap Motion to control everything!

(actually, you've also made me want to build things out of arduinos, but that's another topic lol!)

Cheers!


----------



## muziksculp (May 12, 2021)

Hi @sctaylorcan ,

I'm frequently getting the *LoopMidi Port [Muted]* message issue. What do you think is causing this, since it is an important part of using the MidiPaw with LeapMotion device. ?

*UPDATE : * OK, There is an Un-Mute button on he LoopMidi GUI, I didn't know about this, I clicked on it, and it unmuted the port. I see it alive again now, getting midi data. 

Thanks,
Muziksculp


----------



## sctaylorcan (May 12, 2021)

muziksculp said:


> Hi @sctaylorcan ,
> 
> I'm frequently getting the *LoopMidi Port [Muted]* message issue. What do you think is causing this, since it is an important part of using the MidiPaw with LeapMotion device. ?
> 
> ...


Oh! I'd be super interested to know if it was getting muted due to some kind of too-much-throughput issue. Are you using lots of 14-bit messages? Please PM me and let me know if it mutes _itself_ -- perhaps I have to implement a more obvious / adjustable throttle. I haven't managed to have mine auto-mute (yet  )


----------



## Casiquire (May 12, 2021)

I really appreciate this demo. Is anyone else bothered by how the SM examples have such dramatic dips and swells in volume? Is that really how the library reacts to dynamics? The raw sound itself is good though. The AM just seems to have more natural dynamic swell, but i don't like the tone quite as much


----------



## muziksculp (May 12, 2021)

Using


sctaylorcan said:


> Oh! I'd be super interested to know if it was getting muted due to some kind of too-much-throughput issue. Are you using lots of 14-bit messages? Please PM me and let me know if it mutes _itself_ -- perhaps I have to implement a more obvious / adjustable throttle. I haven't managed to have mine auto-mute (yet  )


Hi,

I'm not using 14-bit message, oh.. how do I use them, what do I need to setup when I enable the 14-bit mode ?

One more question, I'm trying to assign a gesture via MidiPaw to control the Pitchbend of a SWAM solo Strings instrument, I select the Pitchbend from the available parameters, but it doesn't work, it doesn't move the pitchbend of the SWAM Instrument. Any idea what I need to do, to get this working ? Maybe I'm missing something ? or ... ?

Thanks.


----------



## sctaylorcan (May 12, 2021)

muziksculp said:


> Using
> 
> Hi,
> 
> ...


Hi ... Do you see the midi message for pitch bend coming thru to S1 (click the midi symbol to open midi monitor)... If so, is the track monitir armed? Are other features working? Perhaps the SWAM bend is in another midi message? I do use PB all the time, but sorry, don't own SWAM.


----------



## Bollen (May 12, 2021)

Casiquire said:


> I really appreciate this demo. Is anyone else bothered by how the SM examples have such dramatic dips and swells in volume? Is that really how the library reacts to dynamics? The raw sound itself is good though. The AM just seems to have more natural dynamic swell, but i don't like the tone quite as much


That's funny, I was thinking the exact opposite... For me SM sounds quite natural, whereas AM sounds like an Amplitude modulator...


----------



## aisch1212 (May 14, 2021)

Casiquire said:


> I really appreciate this demo. Is anyone else bothered by how the SM examples have such dramatic dips and swells in volume? Is that really how the library reacts to dynamics? The raw sound itself is good though. The AM just seems to have more natural dynamic swell, but i don't like the tone quite as much


I see string insruments have very extreme dynamic differences: From a sound of whispering to that of a motorcycle. The first demo video of samplemodeling in this thread indeed shows a lot of changes of amplitude of sound in comparison to SWAM.

The cause of strangeness you mentioned may be because of EQ. I had equally applied a little gate volume controls to increase the amplitude difference of pp and ff on both SM and AM, which is activated by specific conditions like sustaining very low dynamics for seconds.

Or it might be because my playing technique and instrumental data processing method weren't quite appropriate for string sound generation when i made the video.

Anyway, even without the effect, original dynamics range of Am and SM is very different. That is why SM seems to show more changes on volume than SWAM does under the same condition.

Some guys including me who own SWAM strings sometimes have asked production company why SWAM has a narrow dynamic range compared to real string instruments. I've been heard it is because AM has sacrificed some of features that string instruments originally have to maximize playability and sound qualities, which of course Samplemodeling strings might also has done, except for SM seem to include much more dynamics than AM does, abandoning some of easiability of playing it.

Besides, as have i studied more, now I can make sounds of these instruments better than when I'd started this thread!


----------



## cygnusdei (May 19, 2021)

aisch1212 said:


> I'm looking forwars to listen your work! It is glad that someone tries solo string score with virtual instrument.
> 
> As you'd not be likely to listen me playing elgar's piece until you complete yours, I wanna inform you that I'd used a recored piano accompaniment. A link to the piano sound is wirtten in my youtube video.
> 
> Good luck with your efforts! And let me know if it's done, should you want to.


I finally finished my mock-up and posted on the composition forum (took longer than I thought). I listened to your performance, and I think it does capture the lyrical quality of the piece. It's evident that the sample modeling approach offers more possibilities, i.e. it's about creating sound whereas the sample library approach is about utilizing sound. Maybe further discussion will follow. I'll let you decide if you want to post your performance as a reply to my thread - I think it will be of interest to the community.





__





Elgar Salut d'Amour op. 12 (violin & piano)


This is kind of a spinoff from a discussion on sample modeling from awhile back (OP @aisch1212). Long story short, we agreed to do mock-ups of this piece two ways, with sample modeling and with sample library (yours truly at the sample library, represent! :laugh:). I thought the result could be...




vi-control.net


----------



## Bollen (May 19, 2021)

cygnusdei said:


> I finally finished my mock-up and posted on the composition forum (took longer than I thought). I listened to your performance, and I think it does capture the lyrical quality of the piece. It's evident that the sample modeling approach offers more possibilities, i.e. it's about creating sound whereas the sample library approach is about utilizing sound. Maybe further discussion will follow. I'll let you decide if you want to post your performance as as reply to my thread - I think it will be of interest to the community.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So... Which library did you use?


----------



## cygnusdei (May 19, 2021)

Bollen said:


> So... Which library did you use?


Chris Hein violin (and Garritan Steinway).


----------



## Bollen (May 19, 2021)

cygnusdei said:


> Chris Hein violin (and Garritan Steinway).


Funny... could've put money on that!


----------



## cygnusdei (May 19, 2021)

Bollen said:


> Funny... could've put money on that!


Yeah I wonder if people who have used certain libraries could identify the sound in a blind test.


----------



## Bollen (May 19, 2021)

cygnusdei said:


> Yeah I wonder if people who have used certain libraries could identify the sound in a blind test.


Well I can usually identify VSL quite easily because I've used it for years! CH on the other hand I have never used in a project so I wasn't 100%... But its dead, synthy sound is quite recognisable...


----------



## cygnusdei (May 19, 2021)

Bollen said:


> Well I can usually identify VSL quite easily because I've used it for years! CH on the other hand I have never used in a project so I wasn't 100%... But its dead, synthy sound is quite recognisable...


Lol, I do find its tone a little wonky, I mean for certain articulations. But I think it does have some nice sounds in others. I wonder if there is a newer VSL solo violin offering, the old one seems quite limited in terms of options.


----------



## Bollen (May 19, 2021)

cygnusdei said:


> Lol, I do find its tone a little wonky, I mean for certain articulations. But I think it does have some nice sounds in others. I wonder if there is a newer VSL solo violin offering, the old one seems quite limited on terms of options.


Oh I think it's capable of some good stuff! It's just so difficult to use and such hard work I just can't be bothered with it (it's also not very good at this slow, very expressive playing). VSL on the other hand, marginally easier to use, is capable of a lot if combined with VI Pro. You can get incredibly realistic performance out of it...

I understand that the new solo strings have better cross-fading, but I would never use that on a solo (exposed) instrument.


----------



## cygnusdei (May 20, 2021)

Bollen said:


> Oh I think it's capable of some good stuff! It's just so difficult to use and such hard work I just can't be bothered with it (it's also not very good at this slow, very expressive playing). VSL on the other hand, marginally easier to use, is capable of a lot if combined with VI Pro. You can get incredibly realistic performance out of it...
> 
> I understand that the new solo strings have better cross-fading, but I would never use that on a solo (exposed) instrument.


Interesting. So what would you use for slow, very expressive solo violin?


----------



## Erik (May 20, 2021)

Herewith a few user demos produced with the SWAM3 strings. I made these ones in the past with the SWAM 2, but wasn't very happy with the (sound) output after all. So I thought I give it a try with the new 3 version.

These are all mockups of classical music: the Octet of Mendelssohn-Bartholdy, two solo violin pieces of Bach, the Sonate in G-major of Brahms for violin and piano and Debussy's quartett. I doubt if I would do this again starting from scratch, there is a lot of time input involved here, but I had them already on my HD. I tweaked CC values and velocity as well.

Anyway, I hope you'll like these tracks. It undoubtfully will give you some more information of what these strings are capable of. 

So far I didn't have the time to make these with the SampleModeling ones, so no comparison for you here unfortunately.


----------



## Bollen (May 20, 2021)

cygnusdei said:


> Interesting. So what would you use for slow, very expressive solo violin?


Probably SM, but haven't really worked with it yet. I have an 8dio that can do *One *thing really well... And of course VSL might be able to cut it. If you throw the MIDI my way I might be able to do a few versions.


----------



## Casiquire (May 20, 2021)

Erik said:


> Herewith a few user demos produced with the SWAM3 strings. I made these ones in the past with the SWAM 2, but wasn't very happy with the (sound) output after all. So I thought I give it a try with the new 3 version.
> 
> These are all mockups of classical music: the Octet of Mendelssohn-Bartholdy, two solo violin pieces of Bach, the Sonate in G-major of Brahms for violin and piano and Debussy's quartett. I doubt if I would do this again starting from scratch, there is a lot of time input involved here, but I had them already on my HD. I tweaked CC values and velocity as well.
> 
> ...


I really wish someone could do a blind comparison because, and this is no fault of your own, none of those really ring true to me. I feel that way when i listen to almost any SWAM or SM strings. From where I'm standing it's very difficult to tell if that's because i know they're (mostly) modeled and my ears are playing tricks, or if they actually sound that much worse, or a third option which is that they do have a particular uncanny quality to them but the truth is all quartet libraries do, so hearing them together in a blind test would put it into better perspective. Has anyone done such a thing with recent SWAM/SM?


----------



## AudioLoco (May 20, 2021)

Modeling in general has still such a loooooong and winding road ahead ....


----------



## cygnusdei (May 20, 2021)

Bollen said:


> Probably SM, but haven't really worked with it yet. I have an 8dio that can do *One *thing really well... And of course VSL might be able to cut it. If you through the MIDI my way I might be able to do a few versions.


For the sake of demo, here is the midi of the opening passages (I use separate channels for different articulations). FWIW the tempo here is not exactly slow, it's Andantino after all. 

Side note: the other day someone posted a solo violin demo using Performance Samples and 8dio Adagio, I think.


----------



## aisch1212 (May 20, 2021)

cygnusdei said:


> I finally finished my mock-up and posted on the composition forum (took longer than I thought). I listened to your performance, and I think it does capture the lyrical quality of the piece. It's evident that the sample modeling approach offers more possibilities, i.e. it's about creating sound whereas the sample library approach is about utilizing sound. Maybe further discussion will follow. I'll let you decide if you want to post your performance as a reply to my thread - I think it will be of interest to the community.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks you for doing a wonderful job!

From the beginning of this thread, I've wanted to discover both authentic and promising string solo sound created by virtual instruments. And this kind of example would be a great help for many people to get to know about particular features of various libraries.

I'll post my vid to your thread ASAP.


----------



## aisch1212 (May 20, 2021)

Erik said:


> Herewith a few user demos produced with the SWAM3 strings. I made these ones in the past with the SWAM 2, but wasn't very happy with the (sound) output after all. So I thought I give it a try with the new 3 version.
> 
> These are all mockups of classical music: the Octet of Mendelssohn-Bartholdy, two solo violin pieces of Bach, the Sonate in G-major of Brahms for violin and piano and Debussy's quartett. I doubt if I would do this again starting from scratch, there is a lot of time input involved here, but I had them already on my HD. I tweaked CC values and velocity as well.
> 
> ...


Your works with SWAM are very good quality among similar showcases I've heard in the internet.

Playing classical music can reveal both full forte and shortcomings of the sound, regardless of whether it's of virtual or of real. No tricks can stand.

I'm looking forward to make SM tracks from some of the samples you attached.

Thanks you for really nice works


----------



## givemenoughrope (May 20, 2021)

Erik said:


> Herewith a few user demos produced with the SWAM3 strings. I made these ones in the past with the SWAM 2, but wasn't very happy with the (sound) output after all. So I thought I give it a try with the new 3 version.
> 
> These are all mockups of classical music: the Octet of Mendelssohn-Bartholdy, two solo violin pieces of Bach, the Sonate in G-major of Brahms for violin and piano and Debussy's quartett. I doubt if I would do this again starting from scratch, there is a lot of time input involved here, but I had them already on my HD. I tweaked CC values and velocity as well.
> 
> ...


Very expressive but the sound is still lacking imo. (Would like to hear these done w SM but I realize that's a lot of work.) 

Am I dreaming or did someone trying running AM through impulse responses at some point? On their own they have the quality of electric strings recorded direct so maybe that would help.


----------



## aisch1212 (May 20, 2021)

Casiquire said:


> I really wish someone could do a blind comparison because, and this is no fault of your own, none of those really ring true to me. I feel that way when i listen to almost any SWAM or SM strings. From where I'm standing it's very difficult to tell if that's because i know they're (mostly) modeled and my ears are playing tricks, or if they actually sound that much worse, or a third option which is that they do have a particular uncanny quality to them but the truth is all quartet libraries do, so hearing them together in a blind test would put it into better perspective. Has anyone done such a thing with recent SWAM/SM?


Even though SWAM and Samplemodeling share similar mechanism, It is very hard to find any comparisons with those. That is why I started this thread and posted videos. The idea of blind tests is an excellent idea! I wanna make one if I can. Adding a real play available to candidate would be also good. I remember an episode of an educational TV program about distinguishing authentic one between real and virtual instrument sounds when i was teenage... about 10 years ago. Then, the sound of vst was really fake and bad so comparisons were meaningless. Nowdays, the challenge seems to be likely.

Many of libraries in the market actually let people hear some samples made with the product they are selling. However, the most example tracks are filled with loud ambient sounds or very narrow range of techniques like sustaining a same note for minutes and repeating an identical dull melody in the mood of a new age music. When purchased, They turn out to feature a bad sound out of context and little flexibility. I think VSTis should do more than just playing a matching sound to incoming midi note. Ages passed, tech advanced. Yes. I'm talking about Spitfire Solo Strings. They were worst buy I've ever made.


----------



## aisch1212 (May 20, 2021)

givemenoughrope said:


> Very expressive but the sound is still lacking imo. (Would like to hear these done w SM but I realize that's a lot of work.)
> 
> Am I dreaming or did someone trying running AM through impulse responses at some point? On their own they have the quality of electric strings recorded direct so maybe that would help.


I think the synthetic nature of SWAM strings does not mainly come from its IR. Things like the extreme consistancy of string resonance and too perfect byproduct of sound of playing, which are rooted from very basic sound generation mechanism are suspected as the cause. It's not so problematic when used with fiddle or electric music. Except for that, the weaknesses are highlighted.


----------



## Bollen (May 20, 2021)

AudioLoco said:


> Modeling in general has still such a loooooong and winding road ahead ....


Not as long as you think...


----------



## Noeticus (May 20, 2021)

For some there is no need to wait as SWAM v3 is rather nice, and quite usable.


----------



## givemenoughrope (May 20, 2021)

aisch1212 said:


> I think the synthetic nature of SWAM strings does not mainly come from its IR. Things like the extreme consistancy of string resonance and too perfect byproduct of sound of playing, which are rooted from very basic sound generation mechanism are suspected as the cause. It's not so problematic when used with fiddle or electric music. Except for that, the weaknesses are highlighted.


Are they already using IRs? I meant running them through another IR of a violin or cello body the way an electric player might. Ofc, the consistency won't change but maybe the tone will improve.


----------



## ludwig66661 (Jun 24, 2021)

Something that I'm really waiting for are SWAM string ensambles... 
In my experience after using both SWAM and Sample Modeling (SM) solo instruments, so far, my conclusions are:
1) Both are a few steps ahead from others strings libraries in terms of realism and playability. 
2) just out of the box SM is a bit easier to play than SWAM, but the degrees of freedom are more with SWAM but requires a deeper knowledge about the string instrument in order to play it properly. (To play I use Touche and a keyboard)
3) For composing, in combination with Divisimate and a good reverb plugin (ER and LR) this tools are a dream come true... 

I share to you a recent project using SM for the strings and SWAM for all the rest of the orchestra. 



Cheers!


----------



## tabulius (Jun 25, 2021)

Which library is more demanding on the CPU? I've heard SWAM has quite high CPU usage and even when idle (no notes are played).

I've slowly starting to use libraries that are not that taxing to ram, but my CPU is struggling (Infinite series).


----------



## I like music (Jun 25, 2021)

ludwig66661 said:


> Something that I'm really waiting for are SWAM string ensambles...
> In my experience after using both SWAM and Sample Modeling (SM) solo instruments, so far, my conclusions are:
> 1) Both are a few steps ahead from others strings libraries in terms of realism and playability.
> 2) just out of the box SM is a bit easier to play than SWAM, but the degrees of freedom are more with SWAM but requires a deeper knowledge about the string instrument in order to play it properly. (To play I use Touche and a keyboard)
> ...



Great music!!! The expression sounded great, and tone was good too. What SM settings did you use?


----------



## ludwig66661 (Jun 25, 2021)

I like music said:


> Great music!!! The expression sounded great, and tone was good too. What SM settings did you use?


-Dry patches (almost always the best option if you are going to mix them with other instruments)
-Large Ensamble
-EAReverb 2 (for place in the space)
-Cinematic Rooms (Tail)


----------



## Bollen (Jun 25, 2021)

ludwig66661 said:


> Something that I'm really waiting for are SWAM string ensambles...
> In my experience after using both SWAM and Sample Modeling (SM) solo instruments, so far, my conclusions are:
> 1) Both are a few steps ahead from others strings libraries in terms of realism and playability.
> 2) just out of the box SM is a bit easier to play than SWAM, but the degrees of freedom are more with SWAM but requires a deeper knowledge about the string instrument in order to play it properly. (To play I use Touche and a keyboard)
> ...



Weirdly I'm not convinced about the woodwinds...


----------



## aisch1212 (Jun 25, 2021)

tabulius said:


> Which library is more demanding on the CPU? I've heard SWAM has quite high CPU usage and even when idle (no notes are played).
> 
> I've slowly starting to use libraries that are not that taxing to ram, but my CPU is struggling (Infinite series).


In my test, It's been safe to have a CPU of being more than 6 cores and 16gb+ of ram for both SM and AM, not to cause some cracking noise from DAW. But it seems that AM needs more CPU and Ram Power than SM.

Also, it's apparently a very good idea to use Reaper for AM and SM because it requires little CPU resources compared to other available DAWs.
For instance, FL Studio has a never-ending hunger for CPU.



This stuff is running real-time, costing a giant amount of resource from CPU(6 cores), GPU(1080ti), Ram(32GB), SSD, only for 3D rendering.

With that, the sound was from Sample Modeling Cello ensemble and solo double bass in Reaper, simultaneously running with the 3D stuff in the same computer. Even though heavy EQ is also applied, there were no audio noise or noticeable disturbance for a long(1~2 days) term.


----------



## ludwig66661 (Jun 25, 2021)

tabulius said:


> Which library is more demanding on the CPU? I've heard SWAM has quite high CPU usage and even when idle (no notes are played).
> 
> I've slowly starting to use libraries that are not that taxing to ram, but my CPU is struggling (Infinite series).


Maybe this could help


----------



## CT (Aug 24, 2021)

Over the last week or so I've been using trial versions of all AM instruments, after a renewed interest in this type of VI. Based on these experiments, I am pretty sure that I prefer the SM brass to AM (alas, can't try SM stuff to be certain), and the AM woodwinds are the only game in town, so despite some slight reservations about what those offer, my mind is made up there as well if I were to assemble a collection of this stuff.

The real surprise for me is the AM strings. I expected to feel more confident about the SM strings, although again, unfortunately SM does not offer trials so I can't know for sure. Based on comparisons I'd heard, like this one, SM always seemed to have a little more timbral authenticity, at least in the higher strings. After playing with the AM strings though, I'm somewhat blown away, and wondering what the SM strings might offer beyond these. This isn't a spot-on performance (stuff from Williams' Memoirs of a Geisha) by any means, but it's far more than I think could be achieved in a single pass of live playing using a sampled cello.


Guess I'll read over this thread again, and if anyone has any further thoughts, I'd love to know.


----------



## Noeticus (Aug 24, 2021)

Mike T said:


> Over the last week or so I've been using trial versions of all AM instruments, after a renewed interest in this type of VI. Based on these experiments, I am pretty sure that I prefer the SM brass to AM (alas, can't try SM stuff to be certain), and the AM woodwinds are the only game in town, so despite some slight reservations about what those offer, my mind is made up there as well if I were to assemble a collection of this stuff.
> 
> The real surprise for me is the AM strings. I expected to feel more confident about the SM strings, although again, unfortunately SM does not offer trials so I can't know for sure. Based on comparisons I'd heard, like this one, SM always seemed to have a little more timbral authenticity, at least in the higher strings. After playing with the AM strings though, I'm somewhat blown away, and wondering what the SM strings might offer beyond these. This isn't a spot-on performance (stuff from Williams' Memoirs of a Geisha) by any means, but it's far more than I think could be achieved in a single pass of live playing using a sampled cello.
> 
> ...


So you used SWAM only for this audio file?


----------



## CT (Aug 24, 2021)

Yes, just the SWAM cello with a fair bit of things tweaked and external reverb.


----------



## CT (Aug 24, 2021)

Hey here's a question. SM has had an ongoing sale ever since the plauge hit, but does AM ever do sales?


----------



## Gaffable (Aug 24, 2021)

Mike T said:


> does AM ever do sales?


Yes, for the last three years Audio Modeling has offered 30% off during the November sales.

I just discovered today that a website called Music Interval Theory Academy offers its members an educational discount with Audio Modeling. To see the list of discounts available, scroll half way down this page. A one month subscription with Music Interval Theory Academy costs €35.


----------



## Markrs (Aug 24, 2021)

Mike T said:


> Hey here's a question. SM has had an ongoing sale ever since the plauge hit, but does AM ever do sales?


They do 30% sales 1 or 2 times a year. Next one should be Black Friday.

They currently have a 33% sale on their iPad versions, which are quite reasonably priced. (I’ve picked these up to work alongside Staffpad).


----------



## muziksculp (Aug 24, 2021)

I would like to see Sample Modeling : *Woodwinds* one of these days.

I'm also waiting for their next update for Solo & Ensemble Strings. It's been a while since their last update. Hopefully it's not too far away.


----------



## aisch1212 (Aug 25, 2021)

Mike T said:


> Over the last week or so I've been using trial versions of all AM instruments, after a renewed interest in this type of VI. Based on these experiments, I am pretty sure that I prefer the SM brass to AM (alas, can't try SM stuff to be certain), and the AM woodwinds are the only game in town, so despite some slight reservations about what those offer, my mind is made up there as well if I were to assemble a collection of this stuff.
> 
> The real surprise for me is the AM strings. I expected to feel more confident about the SM strings, although again, unfortunately SM does not offer trials so I can't know for sure. Based on comparisons I'd heard, like this one, SM always seemed to have a little more timbral authenticity, at least in the higher strings. After playing with the AM strings though, I'm somewhat blown away, and wondering what the SM strings might offer beyond these. This isn't a spot-on performance (stuff from Williams' Memoirs of a Geisha) by any means, but it's far more than I think could be achieved in a single pass of live playing using a sampled cello.
> 
> ...


Wonderful! It is very impressive performance. Neither before nor after did I start this thread, I've never seen any solo virtual string that matches capabilities of SWAM and Samplemodeling. And this piece is one of the proofs.

Unfortunately, I disassembled my breath controller to extract a pressure sensor for further researches so I can't make Samplemodeling version of it to give you glimpses of what SM can do.

Yet I really wish you'd get Samplemodeling strings anyway! As you're impressed with SWAM with a practical experience, I'm very confident you would be pleased with it!



And this is me playing SWAM Cello you've just used. Congrats to be a virtual cello guy.


----------



## Simon Ravn (Aug 25, 2021)

muziksculp said:


> I would like to see Sample Modeling : *Woodwinds* one of these days.
> 
> I'm also waiting for their next update for Solo & Ensemble Strings. It's been a while since their last update. Hopefully it's not too far away.


Where can I listen to the music you compose? I just wonder because it seems like you buy and interact in threads about pretty much every library under the sun so I am curious what on earth you do with all those libraries LOL.


----------



## doctoremmet (Aug 25, 2021)

Every once in a while Audiodeluxe run a sale on AM, that only becomes apparent once you put some AM instrument in your cart and they somehow automatically add a coupon code

This is the case as we speak. You have to be logged in to see it. Not a real stunning sale, but hey 10%


----------



## doctoremmet (Aug 25, 2021)

BH Photo seem to have the lowest prices:


----------



## D Halgren (Aug 25, 2021)

doctoremmet said:


> BH Photo seem to have the lowest prices:


The all in bundle is $100 cheaper than Sweetwater where I just picked it up. I am waiting for the woodwinds version 3 to be out before I register, so I don't have to pay for the upgrade. They said it will be early October.


----------



## Noeticus (Aug 25, 2021)

Mike T said:


> Over the last week or so I've been using trial versions of all AM instruments, after a renewed interest in this type of VI. Based on these experiments, I am pretty sure that I prefer the SM brass to AM (alas, can't try SM stuff to be certain), and the AM woodwinds are the only game in town, so despite some slight reservations about what those offer, my mind is made up there as well if I were to assemble a collection of this stuff.
> 
> The real surprise for me is the AM strings. I expected to feel more confident about the SM strings, although again, unfortunately SM does not offer trials so I can't know for sure. Based on comparisons I'd heard, like this one, SM always seemed to have a little more timbral authenticity, at least in the higher strings. After playing with the AM strings though, I'm somewhat blown away, and wondering what the SM strings might offer beyond these. This isn't a spot-on performance (stuff from Williams' Memoirs of a Geisha) by any means, but it's far more than I think could be achieved in a single pass of live playing using a sampled cello.
> 
> ...


This SWAM piece is amazing!

Are you for hire? Cannot find a website for you?


----------



## StillLife (Aug 25, 2021)

Very nice. Think I prefer Sample Modelling. Question about playability: these modeled strings (and brass, and ww) are often heralded for their playability, but in video's the players almost always use breath controllers. Does that mean that you have to get additional gear to enjoy excellent playability, or do these modeled instruments also excel, playability-wise, when you use just a keyboard?


----------



## Noeticus (Aug 25, 2021)

StillLife said:


> Very nice. Think I prefer Sample Modelling. Question about playability: these modeled strings (and brass, and ww) are often heralded for their playability, but in video's the players almost always use breath controllers. Does that mean that you have to get additional gear to enjoy excellent playability, or do these modeled instruments also excel, playability-wise, when you use just a keyboard?


You can do it all within a DAW if you want to, but for real time playing other controllers are preferred than just a keyboard.


----------



## aisch1212 (Aug 25, 2021)

StillLife said:


> Very nice. Think I prefer Sample Modelling. Question about playability: these modeled strings (and brass, and ww) are often heralded for their playability, but in video's the players almost always use breath controllers. Does that mean that you have to get additional gear to enjoy excellent playability, or do these modeled instruments also excel, playability-wise, when you use just a keyboard?


The concept of those advanced modeling techs is to get various real physical factors which affect sound generation of real instrument digitally accessible by players who use virtually modeled instrument software, consequently achieving great amount of realism and playability.

In the other word, inability of freely controlling those data in an efficient way may result in outputs no better than other static and dull sampling VSTs. The main reason old sampling sounds bad is that they cannot properly react to every complicated musical movement. They can't convincingly bridge current phrase to future one under a proper context. It is very hard to get computer do these controlling automatically because the only one who can predict your next move and can prepare a natural transition is no one but you. That is the reason you might need extra gears to do more than just sending notes.

People often use breath controllers 'cause BCs are easy to control CC dynamically, as we're used to breath all the time obviously. Yet conventional mod wheels are less intuitively usable than BC.

You can assume that using conventional sampling VST is like commanding a conductor to lead various instrument players at your request IN REAL-TIME.

On the other hand, using SM or AM is becoming a player yourself.


----------



## muziksculp (Aug 25, 2021)

Do Aaron Ventures : Infinite Instruments qualify as Physically Modeled instruments ? 
I know he is working on Strings next, I wonder how they will compare to SM, and AM strings ?

I also think AM is working on String Ensembles.


----------



## CT (Aug 25, 2021)

Oh thanks everyone, I hadn't thought to look at other resellers for better prices, d'oh. 



aisch1212 said:


> Wonderful! It is very impressive performance. Neither before nor after did I start this thread, I've never seen any solo virtual string that matches capabilities of SWAM and Samplemodeling. And this piece is one of the proofs.
> 
> Unfortunately, I disassembled my breath controller to extract a pressure sensor for further researches so I can't make Samplemodeling version of it to give you glimpses of what SM can do.
> 
> ...



I would not be surprised if I did wind up preferring the SM tone, despite being so impressed with AM. I guess the main thing I wonder about is if they both have the same high degree of detailed control and customization. I'll need to read the SM manual, but even so, it is tough to gamble on investments like this when you can get a taste of one but not the other. 



Noeticus said:


> This SWAM piece is amazing!
> 
> Are you for hire? Cannot find a website for you?


I don't do websites, at least not right now. You can always send me a PM here if you want to talk about anything!


----------



## aisch1212 (Aug 25, 2021)

Mike T said:


> I would not be surprised if I did wind up preferring the SM tone, despite being so impressed with AM. I guess the main thing I wonder about is if they both have the same high degree of detailed control and customization. I'll need to read the SM manual, but even so, it is tough to gamble on investments like this when you can get a taste of one but not the other.


As for features, Here is what I found while using two of the product.

AM supports more flexibility of controls than SM. SM has only two string positions and a bow pressure is not supported. overtone parameter is an alternative to the bow pressure. Other controls are similar.

SM show more wider range of dynamics but less responsive. It restricts its playability in more physically possible way while AM can do what might be impossible with the real string. It can be both pros and cons by the perspective.

SM offers ensembles. AM does not. SM ensemble is slightly less responsive than solo since not being protoss or jager pilots or something, multiple string players in the real world would not conduct same movements simultaneously at every exact moment obviously. You may construct AM ensemble by using multiple of SWAM tracks, but in my experience, It's not more than just experimental.


----------



## CT (Aug 25, 2021)

aisch1212 said:


> As for features, Here is what I found while using two of the product.
> 
> AM supports more flexibility of controls than SM. SM has only two string positions and a bow pressure is not supported. overtone parameter is an alternative to the bow pressure. Other controls are similar.
> 
> ...


Thanks for all this, and your comparison videos. It's all very helpful.


----------



## aisch1212 (Aug 25, 2021)

muziksculp said:


> Do Aaron Ventures : Infinite Instruments qualify as Physically Modeled instruments ?
> I know he is working on Strings next, I wonder how they will compare to SM, and AM strings ?
> 
> I also think AM is working on String Ensembles.


I have a very high hope on Infinite series. As it mainly utilizes samples and algorithm to achieve unique connectivity and naturalness, I guess it is similar to SM somehow but less responsive.

AM loadmap shows they are working on ensembles. They say it's going to take 1~2 years to complete.


----------



## youngpokie (Aug 25, 2021)

Mike T said:


> Yes, just the SWAM cello with a fair bit of things tweaked and external reverb.


Would you mind shedding some light on the amount of tweaking that went into this? Thanks


----------



## muziksculp (Aug 25, 2021)

I should mention that the SM Timbral-Shaping feature is more capable compared to the Timbral Shaping in AM.

You can get a lot of timbral variation using SM Timbral-Shaping. I'm currently trying to sculpt the Timber of the SM Solo Cello to sound more like a Baroque Solo Cello. I will post an audio clip when I feel It sounds good enough to showoff.


----------



## Gaffable (Aug 25, 2021)

StillLife said:


> do these modeled instruments also excel, playability-wise, when you use just a keyboard?


@luigizaccheo has produced some amazing demonstrations of the Audio Modeling instruments:
Antal Zalai/Paganini
Mari Samuelsen
Alison Balsom & Scottish Ensemble
J.S. Bach - Aria
Clean Bandit - Rather Be

In the comments section under the Alison Balsom video, Luigi said (in response to GGAAVV), "I wrote everything on the piano roll, without playing anything with keyboard or other controls." And in response to Wolfgang Valdez, Luigi said, "I wrote everything in step mode on the Cubase sequencer. First I programmed the notes and then the expression parameters such as bow speed, bow pressure, vibrato intensity and speed etc."


----------



## Fa (Aug 26, 2021)

Gaffable said:


> @luigizaccheo ... "I wrote everything on the piano roll, without playing anything with keyboard or other controls." And in response to Wolfgang Valdez, Luigi said, "I wrote everything in step mode on the Cubase sequencer. First I programmed the notes and then the expression parameters such as bow speed, bow pressure, vibrato intensity and speed etc."


...and by the way I think it's pretty audible/noticeable. I did the same every time I had to render complex music, but still the best musical results I ever had, were reached playing live all the parts. Disregarding how good the programming, there is always something "different" between human play and sequencing.

p.s. coming soon new demos of Sample Modeling strings  since v. 2.0 is not so far from being released.


----------



## muziksculp (Aug 26, 2021)

Fa said:


> p.s. coming soon new demos of Sample Modeling strings  since v. 2.0 is not so far from being released.


----------



## Trevor Meier (Aug 26, 2021)

Fa said:


> p.s. coming soon new demos of Sample Modeling strings  since v. 2.0 is not so far from being released.


Now THAT is some exciting news!


----------



## I like music (Aug 26, 2021)

Fa said:


> p.s. coming soon new demos of Sample Modeling strings  since v. 2.0 is not so far from being released.


The word "soon" is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. Can you tell us if it'll be this year?!?!?!

Very exciting news.


----------



## Soundbed (Aug 26, 2021)

I find myself very surprised that I’m in the minority opinion. In the first OP video, I gravitated toward AM every time. SM felt more cringe-y and I wanted to fast forward. As I listened to other videos this was usually reinforced, including the recent cello videos from @Mike T and @aisch1212 

Hard to explain why but both in “active” and “passive” listening (spacing out) I enjoyed AM more. Strangely I felt slightly more like there was a real bow involved. 

I’m also surprised by my own reaction because my inclination was for SM, based on previous listens to the brass. For strings though, AM got my vote this round.


----------



## I like music (Aug 26, 2021)

Mike T said:


> Over the last week or so I've been using trial versions of all AM instruments, after a renewed interest in this type of VI. Based on these experiments, I am pretty sure that I prefer the SM brass to AM (alas, can't try SM stuff to be certain), and the AM woodwinds are the only game in town, so despite some slight reservations about what those offer, my mind is made up there as well if I were to assemble a collection of this stuff.
> 
> The real surprise for me is the AM strings. I expected to feel more confident about the SM strings, although again, unfortunately SM does not offer trials so I can't know for sure. Based on comparisons I'd heard, like this one, SM always seemed to have a little more timbral authenticity, at least in the higher strings. After playing with the AM strings though, I'm somewhat blown away, and wondering what the SM strings might offer beyond these. This isn't a spot-on performance (stuff from Williams' Memoirs of a Geisha) by any means, but it's far more than I think could be achieved in a single pass of live playing using a sampled cello.
> 
> ...


Very good! I think for soloistic stuff (really virtuoso stuff) AM would be ahead of SM. I used to have AM but due to money issues had to resell them. Happy enough with SM, though I still feel the cello tone is a bit wonky (especially in the ensembles). I also think that AM has a better "transition" script or whatever it might be. But that's just going off memory for a product I owned a couple of years ago.

Really keen on seeing the SM updates since they promise some kind of big changes.

In either case, that cello you used there would do the trick for the vast majority of people I think.


----------



## Oxytoxine (Aug 26, 2021)

Soundbed said:


> I find myself very surprised that I’m in the minority opinion. In the first OP video, I gravitated toward AM every time. SM felt more cringe-y and I wanted to fast forward. As I listened to other videos this was usually reinforced, including the recent cello videos from @Mike T and @aisch1212
> 
> Hard to explain why but both in “active” and “passive” listening (spacing out) I enjoyed AM more. Strangely I felt slightly more like there was a real bow involved.
> 
> I’m also surprised by my own reaction because my inclination was for SM, based on previous listens to the brass. For strings though, AM got my vote this round.


This is also my impression. I only have SM and only very recently got it, but from the demos in this thread I often prefer AM strings - not exactly sure why, but in certain passages they seem more coherent to me. Maybe it's the rapid volume changes in some of the (beautifully crafted!) SM demos, or maybe something similar that I also hear / feel when comparing Pianoteq to sampled pianos - maybe slightly more artificial, but more coherent.


----------



## Oxytoxine (Aug 26, 2021)

Ve


Mike T said:


> Over the last week or so I've been using trial versions of all AM instruments, after a renewed interest in this type of VI. Based on these experiments, I am pretty sure that I prefer the SM brass to AM (alas, can't try SM stuff to be certain), and the AM woodwinds are the only game in town, so despite some slight reservations about what those offer, my mind is made up there as well if I were to assemble a collection of this stuff.
> 
> The real surprise for me is the AM strings. I expected to feel more confident about the SM strings, although again, unfortunately SM does not offer trials so I can't know for sure. Based on comparisons I'd heard, like this one, SM always seemed to have a little more timbral authenticity, at least in the higher strings. After playing with the AM strings though, I'm somewhat blown away, and wondering what the SM strings might offer beyond these. This isn't a spot-on performance (stuff from Williams' Memoirs of a Geisha) by any means, but it's far more than I think could be achieved in a single pass of live playing using a sampled cello.
> 
> ...





Mike T said:


> Over the last week or so I've been using trial versions of all AM instruments, after a renewed interest in this type of VI. Based on these experiments, I am pretty sure that I prefer the SM brass to AM (alas, can't try SM stuff to be certain), and the AM woodwinds are the only game in town, so despite some slight reservations about what those offer, my mind is made up there as well if I were to assemble a collection of this stuff.
> 
> The real surprise for me is the AM strings. I expected to feel more confident about the SM strings, although again, unfortunately SM does not offer trials so I can't know for sure. Based on comparisons I'd heard, like this one, SM always seemed to have a little more timbral authenticity, at least in the higher strings. After playing with the AM strings though, I'm somewhat blown away, and wondering what the SM strings might offer beyond these. This isn't a spot-on performance (stuff from Williams' Memoirs of a Geisha) by any means, but it's far more than I think could be achieved in a single pass of live playing using a sampled cello.
> 
> ...


Very nice! Wait, where can I find the demo versions? I did not find them on the AM website? Thanks!


----------



## Oxytoxine (Aug 26, 2021)

Fa said:


> ...and by the way I think it's pretty audible/noticeable. I did the same every time I had to render complex music, but still the best musical results I ever had, were reached playing live all the parts. Disregarding how good the programming, there is always something "different" between human play and sequencing.
> 
> p.s. coming soon new demos of Sample Modeling strings  since v. 2.0 is not so far from being released.


What great news! 

I am aware that you can't share specifics, but could you share whether V2 has some big changes regarding the user interaction with the instrument / interface / its "inherent logic"?

I ask because I just recently got SM strings and wonder whether it might be worth postponing the learning process if a lot will be different in the new version. Thanks a lot!


----------



## Fa (Aug 26, 2021)

Oxytoxine said:


> What great news!
> 
> I am aware that you can't share specifics, but could you share whether V2 has some big changes regarding the user interaction with the instrument / interface / its "inherent logic"?
> 
> I ask because I just recently got SM strings and wonder whether it might be worth postponing the learning process if a lot will be different in the new version. Thanks a lot!


We had some anticipation about it, and I can confirm that no big changes in interaction are planned at all (so please keep developing your learning curve, nothing will be lost). 

The whole work was on sound, articulations, and some (personally I find it exciting) extension in the package with a brand-new Chamber section with very special identity: it will offer the same amount of control of the solos, but with the very defined sound of a small section of few players, closing the gap between solos and the orchestral ensembles. It will be perfect for chamber and studio strings (e.g. from early music to soundtrack or pop music), for hyper-realistic orchestral divisi, and to add depth and expression to the larger ensembles (overlapping/mixing perfectly).

Yes developers still plan to release it before the end of the year (likely by end of summer or early autumn, if nothing wrong happens).


----------



## robgb (Aug 26, 2021)

I have AM and SM. I have version 2 of AM, since after demoing the V3 upgrades, I don't think there's enough of a difference, sonically or otherwise, to warrant the upgrade price. I've found that with AM, it's best to use the Electric Violin setting and add a Stradivarius IR to it.

That said, Sample Modeling's strings are far superior to my ears, and the AM strings don't get much use anymore. I look forward to seeing what they do with version 2.


----------



## muziksculp (Aug 26, 2021)

Hi, 

Is there a way to get SM Solo & Ens. Strings to go down to Niente when Expression (CC11) is set to zero ? 

As is I can't get them to go down to complete silence using CC11, any feedback on this would be helpful. 

Thanks.


----------



## Oxytoxine (Aug 26, 2021)

Fa said:


> We had some anticipation about it, and I can confirm that no big changes in interaction are planned at all (so please keep developing your learning curve, nothing will be lost).
> 
> The whole work was on sound, articulations, and some (personally I find it exciting) extension in the package with a brand-new Chamber section with very special identity: it will offer the same amount of control of the solos, but with the very defined sound of a small section of few players, closing the gap between solos and the orchestral ensembles. It will be perfect for chamber and studio strings (e.g. from early music to soundtrack or pop music), for hyper-realistic orchestral divisi, and to add depth and expression to the larger ensembles (overlapping/mixing perfectly).
> 
> Yes developers still plan to release it before the end of the year (likely by end of summer or early autumn, if nothing wrong happens).


Merci beaucoup! Oh my gush - fantastic news, I am sooo looking forward to these enhancements, especially the chamber sections, this would fit precisely my use case. Great!


----------



## Oxytoxine (Aug 26, 2021)

robgb said:


> I have AM and SM. I have version 2 of AM, since after demoing the V3 upgrades, I don't think there's enough of a difference, sonically or otherwise, to warrant the upgrade price. I've found that with AM, it's best to use the Electric Violin setting and add a Stradivarius IR to it.
> 
> That said, Sample Modeling's strings are far superior to my ears, and the AM strings don't get much use anymore. I look forward to seeing what they do with version 2.


Thank you, I will try the trick with the Electric Violin and using an additional IR.

I could kick myself that I was not patient and see your comment only now. I just listened to various AM demos on the way home (on shitty headphones) and was rather impressed - could not resist and directly bought them.

After 30 min playing I come to the same conclusion as you - SM strings sound far superior to me, way more realistic. Of course not enough time for a judgement yet, but the difference seems really rather stark to me. For example the attack / velocity behavior seems strange / missing to me, but first I of course have to test all the settings. Very sad, because I find the user interface to be stellar compared to SM.

I am really confused and do not yet have an explanation for the discrepancy in sound I heard in some demos (also the contributions in this thread) when compared to what I hear and feel having them directly under my fingers :/ What a stupid and expensive mistake. Anyway, sorry for the rant, just wanted to say that I seem to have a very similar opinion to yours and that I am glad I read your comment, because it confirmed I am not crazy (at least in this regard .


----------



## CT (Aug 26, 2021)

Ah, a Sample Modeling update? Maybe worth waiting then....


----------



## muziksculp (Aug 26, 2021)

It would be useful if the upcoming SM Solo & Ens Strings update will offer a Niente option for experssion (CC11), as is I can't get complete silence when CC11 is set to Zero.

SM solo & Ens. Strings users, are you bothered by this detail ? would you prefer to have a Niente option for CC11 ? How are you dealing with this limitation ?


----------



## Bollen (Aug 26, 2021)

muziksculp said:


> It would be useful if the upcoming SM Solo & Ens Strings update will offer a Niente option for experssion (CC11), as is I can't get complete silence when CC11 is set to Zero.
> 
> SM solo & Ens. Strings users, are you bothered by this detail ? would you prefer to have a Niente option for CC11 ? How are you dealing with this limitation ?


Although technically only a clarinet or saxophone can do a "real" niente, I do find that the dynamic range is too small for a "fake" niente (as it would occur on the real instrument). I explored using the timbral shaping tool, but in the end just CC7 was sufficient...


----------



## I like music (Aug 26, 2021)

muziksculp said:


> It would be useful if the upcoming SM Solo & Ens Strings update will offer a Niente option for experssion (CC11), as is I can't get complete silence when CC11 is set to Zero.
> 
> SM solo & Ens. Strings users, are you bothered by this detail ? would you prefer to have a Niente option for CC11 ? How are you dealing with this limitation ?


I definitely had the same feedback too


----------



## muziksculp (Aug 26, 2021)

I find using CC11 to end a note, which doesn't go to Niente, but rather goes abrubtly to silence like being cut-off all of a sudden when I move CC11 gradually to zero, ruins the realism, and the delicate way to end notes.

Hopefully they can improve this important detail.


----------



## Bollen (Aug 26, 2021)

muziksculp said:


> I find using CC11 to end a note, which doesn't go to Niente, but rather goes abrubtly to silence like being cut-off all of a sudden when I move CC11 gradually to zero, ruins the realism, and the delicate way to end notes.
> 
> Hopefully they can improve this important detail.


Have you experimented with the release knob (CC27)? In some, louder, scenarios it seems to work quite well!


----------



## muziksculp (Aug 26, 2021)

Bollen said:


> Have you experimented with the release knob (CC27)? In some, louder, scenarios it seems to work quite well!


No, I haven't but I remember using it a while back, and I didn't notice it doing anything special. I will give it another try, but I doubt it's what I'm looking for.


----------



## I like music (Aug 27, 2021)

Bollen said:


> Have you experimented with the release knob (CC27)? In some, louder, scenarios it seems to work quite well!


Interesting. Must try this.


----------



## aisch1212 (Aug 28, 2021)

muziksculp said:


> Hi,
> 
> Is there a way to get SM Solo & Ens. Strings to go down to Niente when Expression (CC11) is set to zero ?
> 
> As is I can't get them to go down to complete silence using CC11, any feedback on this would be helpful.



What you are looking for is exactly what I've been looking for from AM and SM.
When I asked AM about this function, I was told that AM SWAM Strings sacrifice some of features of real instrument for a playability. Even though SM supports much more dynamic variations, It is not of full range either.

There are several steps I applied to achieve a natural transition from on to off of a string instrument.

There is a add-on called* General Dynamics* in Reaper. It acts like a volume gate + compressor stuff with attack and release controls. It can change the output volume if the original volume of track changes.

For example, properly tweaked, It can start to slowly reduce the volume of a SM string to Niente-like level, according to the event of a certain condition where the minimum volume that SM can achieve persists for 2~3 seconds.

Lastly, the string instrument is very hard to play quietly. It makes noticeable noises with a very light bowing. In real life, the distance and reverb usually help smoothing the sound. So I disabled internal reverb effects of SM and enabled a independent reverb software AFTER I applied the general dynamics plug-in. The separated reverb is necessary since the volume of pure string sound should be solely controlled by general dynamics, not reverb sound of it.


[WITH Samplemodeling violin]
*[Original Violin with no effects]*
View attachment s_raw.mp3


*[Original Violin with Reverb]*
View attachment s_raw_rb.mp3



*[Refined Violin with General Dynamics]*
View attachment s_dy.mp3



*[Refined Violin with General Dynamics & Reverb]*
View attachment s_dy_rb.mp3


----------



## muziksculp (Aug 28, 2021)

aisch1212 said:


> What you are looking for is exactly what I've been looking for from AM and SM.
> When I asked AM about this function, I was told that AM SWAM Strings sacrifice some of features of real instrument for a playability. Even though SM supports much more dynamic variations, It is not of full range either.
> 
> There are several steps I applied to achieve a natural transition from on to off of a string instrument.
> ...


Hi @aisch1212 ,

Thank You for your helpful feedback. 

Surely adding reverb helps in soothing out the end of the notes transition to silence. I don't use Reaper. So, I guess I will just have to live the reverb solution, which is ok, but not perfect. 

I would really prefer if Sample Modeling fixed this detail, and offered a true Niente functionality for the library. 

Cheers,
Muziksculp


----------



## Noeticus (Aug 28, 2021)

I am going to email SWAM and ask them if I can have their Strings software from the year 2029 now, as I cannot wait to see what the future holds, and of course by then deep learning AI software etc. will give us so much that we will be in AWE!!!

And, I'm already blown away be what SWAM can do.


----------



## muziksculp (Aug 28, 2021)

Hi,

I have been experimenting with SM Solo Strings to make them sound like Baroque/Period Instruments.

I started with the SM Solo Cello, I'm still working on improving it, but to give you a taste of what it sounds like at this stage, here is a short audio clip of SM Solo Baroque Cello. 

I have quite a bit more to get it to where I want it be, but I'm quite confident I can get it to that level by tweaking, and sculpting it further. Also getting better at performing it using a Breath Controller. 

View attachment Baroq SM Cello v1.mp3


----------



## Fa (Aug 29, 2021)

muziksculp said:


> Hi,
> 
> I have been experimenting with SM Solo Strings to make them sound like Baroque/Period Instruments.
> 
> ...


you will be delighted by the sound of the new update, that will help a lot in this direction.


----------



## Faruh Al-Baghdadi (Aug 30, 2021)

I wish we could combine both as SM has batter legatos, while AM has much better vibratos.


----------



## CT (Aug 31, 2021)

I managed to do a whole piece using these strings yesterday as a final test before my SWAM trials ran out; incidentally, this is the first thing of my own I've really liked in some time, and the flexibility of these VIs probably does deserve some credit for that. Here's a bit of it.




I will be getting the strings. However, the high CPU use has forced my hand in terms of _finally_ getting a new computer, so that probably needs to happen first.


----------



## I like music (Sep 1, 2021)

Mike T said:


> I managed to do a whole piece using these strings yesterday as a final test before my SWAM trials ran out; incidentally, this is the first thing of my own I've really liked in some time, and the flexibility of these VIs probably does deserve some credit for that. Here's a bit of it.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Very good! As I said, I'm sad I had to sell mine. I definitely see more parity between AM and SM strings than some here do. But then I don't have a finely tuned ear, where perhaps others do.

This sits nicely, expression is great. To be honest I can't see many libraries pulling off much better than this?

If you want to share the MIDI, happy to try to have a crack at recreating it with SM strings, bone-dry, and you can try to place it in the same track, FWIW.

I am super keen on seeing where the ensembles go with SM strings' new update. When I bought them I was impressed through the roof. Then over the years I became less enamoured, as tends to happen with most things we're familiar with. Still great strings, but the tone/placing (tone in the lowest dynamics) is something that I couldn't QUITE satisfy myself with - more to do with my own skills than the libraries perhaps, as I've heard much better results from others.

In any case, my personal opinion is that for something like solo strings, the modeling/hybrid approach is where the future could be. Lets see!


----------



## Maarten (Sep 6, 2021)

For those who are interested, I just posted a comparison (only music) between Sample Modeling and (SW)Audio Modeling on YouTube. The first eight bars, of the final movement of a string quartet of Haydn (op.73).

I think both VST's are fantastic. SW(Audio Modeling) easier to work with. Sample Modeling more punch and realism in the sound, but the Cello of SWAM sounds better.

Recorded all the parts 'live' 120 BPM. Playback 150 BPM. Used a TEC control for expression. Modwheel for vibrato.



(Edited those confusing names, twice)


----------



## richhickey (Sep 6, 2021)

Maarten said:


> For those who are interested, I just posted a comparison (only music) between AM and SWAM on YouTube. The first eight bars, of the final movement of a string quartet of Haydn (op.73).


Nice comparison, thanks (it's between _SM_ and SWAM/AM though). I think it highlights perfectly the differences between the two that you often don't get from demos of only legatos and dynamics rides. SM has better IRs/tone, and that's about it. It fails to provide sufficient diversity of attacks to sound realistic during varied bowing and collapses into an accordion/keyboard effect.

SWAM/AM has way better performance modeling and bow onset variation (given effort). OTOH it consistently lets us down in the tone department. We (customers) have been asking for better IRs/tone for a long time and in V3 we didn't get them.


----------



## MrTopo! (Oct 26, 2021)

Fa said:


> p.s. coming soon new demos of Sample Modeling strings  since v. 2.0 is not so far from being released.


Wow!! I buyed SM Strings no long time ago, I hope v2 to be free update for v1 owners. Or at least very cheap! Waiting the new version excited


----------



## DANIELE (Oct 26, 2021)

MrTopo! said:


> Wow!! I buyed SM Strings no long time ago, I hope v2 to be free update for v1 owners. Or at least very cheap! Waiting the new version excited


It will be a free update.


----------



## muziksculp (Oct 26, 2021)

The current version of SM Solo & Ens. Strings is 1.2b, if the upcoming update is ver. 2.0, it must be quite a significant update in terms of improvements, and it will also offer Chamber Strings. 

I hope it will be a game changer  not just some small improvements.


----------



## Syncopator (Nov 2, 2021)

Tralen said:


> The problem I see with Sample Modeling, and that has prevented me from buying their products, is that there appears to be simply no progression. I can't find information about new instruments or any meaningful update, so I worry about purchasing a dead product.
> 
> The Horn & Tuba update to version 3 was in 2015. I don't know if there was any update since then, the site doesn't make it clear. The Trumpet and Trombone are even older.
> 
> I worry about investing in the Strings library for this reason, even though it is a new library.


But if they already sound fantastic (and they do), why does that matter? You just want updates for the sake of calling them updates?


----------



## Syncopator (Nov 2, 2021)

Casiquire said:


> I really appreciate this demo. Is anyone else bothered by how the SM examples have such dramatic dips and swells in volume? Is that really how the library reacts to dynamics? The raw sound itself is good though. The AM just seems to have more natural dynamic swell, but i don't like the tone quite as much


He programmed them that way. I, too, didn't care for the extreme swells, but that's not the instrument; those are the user's decisions.


----------



## Vlzmusic (Nov 2, 2021)

Syncopator said:


> But if they already sound fantastic (and they do), why does that matter? You just want updates for the sake of calling them updates?


Many wish for samples level of sound fidelity + the modeled behavior. The sound is not quite there yet, for any of the modeling instruments.


----------



## Syncopator (Nov 2, 2021)

richhickey said:


> SM has better IRs/tone, and that's about it. It fails to provide sufficient diversity of attacks to sound realistic during varied bowing and collapses into an accordion/keyboard effect.


While I understand your point, how do you know that the "accordion effect" is an inherent deficiency in the instrument itself, rather than a deficiency in the user's programming? (No offense intended to the programmer.) Perhaps additional controllers could have been employed that would have improved the sound of the attacks and transitions in those fast passages.


----------



## Syncopator (Nov 2, 2021)

Vlzmusic said:


> Many wish for samples level of sound fidelity + the modeled behavior. The sound is not quite there yet, for any of the modeling instruments.


For the string instruments, yes, more development is required. But the wind instruments are already quite spectacular—as long as one takes the time to learn how to properly use them.


----------



## Vlzmusic (Nov 2, 2021)

Syncopator said:


> For the string instruments, yes, more development is required. But the wind instruments are already quite spectacular—as long as one takes the time to learn how to properly use them.


Yes, they are more advanced at this point, but I hope they will continue to grow, specially woods, which need very fine balance between noise and woody timbre. Brass was always easier to get the sound, and even my first modeled set, which I bought circa 2006 - Wallander instruments, got very decent sounding brass.


----------



## Bollen (Nov 2, 2021)

I have to agree with @Vlzmusic here about the round-robin or lack-thereof in terms of attacks... There's work arounds, but I would prefer to have more timbre variation.


----------



## Tralen (Nov 2, 2021)

Syncopator said:


> But if they already sound fantastic (and they do), why does that matter? You just want updates for the sake of calling them updates?


It matters if that means I won't get support or won't have a working product in the long run. I'm not in a position to constantly purchase libraries like many people here. Updates are just a visible feature that suggests that a product is maintained.

In any case, Fa convinced me to trust the company and I bought the libraries. I'm very satisfied with them.


----------



## Nico5 (Nov 2, 2021)

I've long loved the idea of side by side comparisons with the same multi-dimensional midi input, since that seems very fair.

But upon listening to the original video and reading through the comments in this thread, I'm now questioning that long held belief of mine.

That's because these are two different instruments. And in the real world, wouldn't a highly accomplished player play different instruments somewhat differently to coax out of them what she or he wanted to achieve? So would a virtuoso player be able to make two instruments sound more alike, by playing them somewhat differently? But that player might have a real preference of one instrument over another, because they can get to their sound much easier. And might two different virtuoso players pick two different favorites?

So, once the 2 instruments are of somewhat similar quality, is it even possible to pick a favorite just via listening to it without playing both yourself?

But I still love the side by side comparison in this case, (thank you @aisch1212 !), since I think it did show that both sets of instruments are capable of a lot of expressiveness, and generally in a similar league of quality - and therefore close contenders. But I haven't been able to consistently pick one side over the other.


----------



## Bollen (Nov 3, 2021)

cygnusdei said:


> For the sake of demo, here is the midi of the opening passages (I use separate channels for different articulations). FWIW the tempo here is not exactly slow, it's Andantino after all.
> 
> Side note: the other day someone posted a solo violin demo using Performance Samples and 8dio Adagio, I think.


I just realised I hadn't sent you these... And it took me ages to find your post again! 

Sorry for the delay. 

VSL:
View attachment VSL.mp3


SM:
View attachment SM.mp3


----------



## CT (Nov 3, 2021)

Gosh, that VSL one is... curious....

This is not the same MIDI and I don't really know the piece off the top of my head so no proper phrasing or anything, but for the sake of comparison, SWAM Violin:


----------



## Bollen (Nov 3, 2021)

Michaelt said:


> Gosh, that VSL one is... curious....


How so...? BTW, the MIDI is in my quoted reply if you so wish it...


----------



## CT (Nov 3, 2021)

Bollen said:


> How so...?


It's a bit, how you say, awful.


----------



## muziksculp (Nov 4, 2021)

@Michaelt ,

Was that SWAM Violin V3 ? 

Sounds great. 

Thanks.


----------



## CT (Nov 4, 2021)

Yes it is v3. Don't listen too closely and they sound pretty good.


----------



## muziksculp (Nov 4, 2021)

Michaelt said:


> Yes it is v3. Don't listen too closely and they sound pretty good.


I like the way they sound closely too.  

THANKS


----------



## Bollen (Nov 4, 2021)

Michaelt said:


> It's a bit, how you say, awful.


Couldn't agree more... How times have changed! When I bought it about 15 years ago it was the most realistic thing on the market!


----------



## Vlzmusic (Nov 4, 2021)

Swam indeed sounds the best in this comparison, but the VSL version is hardly representative. It can do a lot more, but the workflow is not to try and build a demo in 10 minutes, from 2-3 articulations. I do not insist that mega-samples picking approach is better, but this is not the result you should get.


----------



## Bollen (Nov 4, 2021)

Vlzmusic said:


> but the VSL version is hardly representative


Ouch...! 😢


----------



## Syncopator (Nov 24, 2021)

Michaelt said:


> Gosh, that VSL one is... curious....
> 
> This is not the same MIDI and I don't really know the piece off the top of my head so no proper phrasing or anything, but for the sake of comparison, SWAM Violin:
> 
> View attachment 61113


These examples, to me, are a perfect demonstration of the difficulty in making a "blanket" assessment of these instruments. Earlier, throughout this thread, so many said that SampleModeling (SM) has the "better tone," and I often agreed. However, in this last example by Michaelt, AudioModeling (AM) clearly has the better tone.

But why is that? In my opinion, there are two, primary reasons: First, he played the melody more slowly, which allowed more time for the vibrato to naturally "mature." Secondly, he used, to my ear, the correct *amount* of vibrato, which I believe is controlled by the mod wheel. (I realize this is subjective. Perhaps instead of saying it was "correct," I should say it was the amount that sounded most realistic.)

cygnusdei's example was played faster (which is fine), but respectfully, the vibrato wasn't programmed to my liking. (No offense intended! I thank you for your example!)

My point is that so much of the results with these instruments depends upon decisions made by the performer. Again, in response to earlier examples, so many of us agreed that SM tended to sound better than AM. But in this more recent "shootout," AM clearly sounds better.

So, were our previous opinions about AM's "inferior" tone simply a reaction to performances that weren't as skilled as Michaelt's performance? Probably. Because unless he tricked us and actually recorded a real violin playing, I think he showed that AM can sound fantastic—if properly performed.

I wish I could now hear Michaelt perform the same melody with SM. THAT would be a true comparison. 😊

Additional thoughts: I acknowledge that Maarten van der Peet's video example *appeared* to reveal deficiencies in SM's bowing in those faster passages. (Or did it? Could he have tweaked the MIDI to make it sound better? Does SM have controllers that would have improved those passages? I don't know.)

I remain on the fence. I should add that I have ALL of the wind and brass instruments (some by SM and some by AM), and I love, love, love them. I've bought solo strings from CSS, 8Dio, Spitfire, and more—and I'm disappointed with them all. I was so hopeful that SM would release v2 by now (Black-Friday week) so that I could make a decision between SM and AM, which is currently 25% off.

This is a frustrating conundrum because I can either save money on AM right now, or I can wait until SM is released to see if it sounds better and what features have been added—but it's looking like that may not happen during the holiday-sale period.

Final thought: One user in the thread said SM is easier to get results with immediately, and AM requires more tweaking. That's a factor for me, as well. It's nice to just open the instrument and to be able to get a reasonable result with less tweaking. I don't mind tweaking—and I do program CCs to get the result I want—but hearing that SM requires less tweaking to get a decent result is a HUGE advantage for me (if he's correct).

That said, I used the AM tenor sax this week, and although I've used it before, I was, once again, stunned at how easy it was to perform with nothing but the mod wheel. But strings are more complicated instruments to replicate.

Question: Does either SM v2 or AM v3 offer any "humanize" features that introduce subtle variations?


----------



## muziksculp (Nov 24, 2021)

Syncopator said:


> That said, I used the AM tenor sax this week, and although I've used it before, I was, once again, stunned at how easy it was to perform with nothing but the mod wheel. But strings are more complicated instruments to replicate.


Are you using the V3 AM Saxes ? How do you like them ? 

Do you have the AM Flutes V3 ? 

Thanks.


----------



## CT (Nov 24, 2021)

Syncopator said:


> These examples, to me, are a perfect demonstration of the difficulty in making a "blanket" assessment of these instruments. Earlier, throughout this thread, so many said that SampleModeling (SM) has the "better tone," and I often agreed. However, in this last example by Michaelt, AudioModeling (AM) clearly has the better tone.
> 
> But why is that? In my opinion, there are two, primary reasons: First, he played the melody more slowly, which allowed more time for the vibrato to naturally "mature." Secondly, he used, to my ear, the correct *amount* of vibrato, which I believe is controlled by the mod wheel. (I realize this is subjective. Perhaps instead of saying it was "correct," I should say it was the amount that sounded most realistic.)
> 
> ...


Hi there. Glad you liked the sound here. Before I owned these I largely agreed that SM seemed to have better tone from user demos, although it became more complicated in the lower string comparisons. AM allows a trial, so I was able to at least put their strings to the test before committing. It didn't take very long to realize the potential there and buy them, not because I think SM is incapable of better, but because I can not trial them to be sure. I do wish I could!

As for the amount of tweaking needed... yes I've seen videos with many CC rows, people playing with a bunch of controls separately in real time... it seems a little silly to me. What you heard above is breath controller dynamics, modwheel vibrato, and two pedals: sustain which affects how the transitions behave, and a second which controls if the bow stays on the string or leaves it. Some other parameters are "sensibly" (in my mind (though string players were consulted)) bound to the dynamic and vibrato controls at varying amounts, so that, again in my mind, things behave as a real instrument/real player would.

It's just those four controllers used along with the right hand playing notes, all in real time. I do have a number of other controls mapped to my keyboard's faders, but they're not all that different from keyswitch functions (bow position, mutes, harmonics etc.). I've also changed some stuff under the hood, permanently, but that only needs to be done once, like CC assignments, and saved as a default.

If you like the result, this should indicate to you how much actual tweaking is needed to get a satisfactory result. You just need to set up the right way and play.


----------



## Syncopator (Nov 24, 2021)

muziksculp said:


> Are you using the V3 AM Saxes ? How do you like them ?
> 
> Do you have the AM Flutes V3 ?
> 
> Thanks.


Yes. v3 saxes. Love them. 

I upgraded to the v3 flutes, but I haven't played with them yet. Loved the v2 flutes.


----------



## muziksculp (Nov 24, 2021)

Syncopator said:


> Yes. v3 saxes. Love them.
> 
> I upgraded to the v3 flutes, but I haven't played with them yet. Loved the v2 flutes.


Hi @Syncopator,

THANKS  

I would be very interested in knowing how you like V3 Flutes, and if you think they are a big improvement over V2. 

I don't have their SWAM Flutes, or Saxes, and I'm a bit disappointed they were not on sale this BF. But I might just pick one of them. not sure which one yet.


----------



## Syncopator (Nov 24, 2021)

Michaelt said:


> Hi there. Glad you liked the sound here. Before I owned these I largely agreed that SM seemed to have better tone from user demos, although it became more complicated in the lower string comparisons. AM allows a trial, so I was able to at least put their strings to the test before committing. It didn't take very long to realize the potential there and buy them, not because I think SM is incapable of better, but because I can not trial them to be sure. I do wish I could!
> 
> As for the amount of tweaking needed... yes I've seen videos with many CC rows, people playing with a bunch of controls separately in real time... it seems a little silly to me. What you heard above is breath controller dynamics, modwheel vibrato, and two pedals: sustain which affects how the transitions behave, and a second which controls if the bow stays on the string or leaves it. Some other parameters are "sensibly" (in my mind (though string players were consulted)) bound to the dynamic and vibrato controls at varying amounts, so that, again in my mind, things behave as a real instrument/real player would.
> 
> ...


Thank you for this detailed follow-up. It's very helpful indeed.

I don't have a breath controller, but would not be opposed to getting one, if that makes a big difference and is easier or more intuitive than adding those parameters after the fact with a fader or in my DAW.

What gives me pause, however, is your description of a second pedal _"which controls if the bow stays on the string or leaves it."_ As a pianist (even with a master's degree in arranging), I would literally have no clue when to "tell" the bow to stay on, or leave, a string. 😂 That's frankly the kind of thing I don't ever want to have to think about. I want software to make intelligent decisions about that on my behalf. Kudos to you for considering (and apparently mastering) that! I simply wouldn't know how to make those choices (though I'd be willing to learn).

With the wind instruments, I do tend to go back and edit the CCs for vibrato rate and/or intensity, as well as other options like growl or flutter-tongue, etc. But generally speaking, it's easy to get a nice-sounding performance without much fuss.

I realize string instruments are more complex. I'm curious: Are you a string player? How did you learn about bowing? Clearly your methods produce good results, so my hat's off to you for that. I'm just not sure if I want to travel down that same road. If SM's strings make more of those decisions for us, that would be the route I'd want to go. That said, AM is on sale now, and SM isn't (nor have they released v2, which I'd hoped would be released this week).


----------



## Bollen (Nov 24, 2021)

Syncopator said:


> These examples, to me, are a perfect demonstration of the difficulty in making a "blanket" assessment of these instruments. Earlier, throughout this thread, so many said that SampleModeling (SM) has the "better tone," and I often agreed. However, in this last example by Michaelt, AudioModeling (AM) clearly has the better tone.
> 
> But why is that? In my opinion, there are two, primary reasons: First, he played the melody more slowly, which allowed more time for the vibrato to naturally "mature." Secondly, he used, to my ear, the correct *amount* of vibrato, which I believe is controlled by the mod wheel. (I realize this is subjective. Perhaps instead of saying it was "correct," I should say it was the amount that sounded most realistic.)
> 
> ...


Not just to give you a better comparison, but also for myself. I have to say, I have become almost allergic to the "collage of sounds" that VSL offers. So here are the 2 aforementioned violins, but performed like @Michaelt did. The only added thing was trying to match the reverb, they're mostly dry with a little tail, but otherwise straight out of the box.

SM:
View attachment SM.mp3


VSL:
View attachment VSL.mp3


----------



## CT (Nov 24, 2021)

Syncopator said:


> Thank you for this detailed follow-up. It's very helpful indeed.
> 
> I don't have a breath controller, but would not be opposed to getting one, if that makes a big difference and is easier or more intuitive than adding those parameters after the fact with a fader or in my DAW.
> 
> ...


The thing is, you don't even have to deal with something like the on/off bow control to get a usable result. I don't think I used it in this excerpt, it's more about specific control of phrase endings and shorter notes' behavior. I am not a string player, I'm a brass amateur (mainly a keyboardist), so I'm really just going by my broader understanding of the instruments, playing technique, and asking real players when I'm unsure of something. Controlling these parameters is more of a bonus for me. I am not trying to fool experienced string players with my use of the SWAM soloists, I'm just trying to make the most of what they can do beyond traditional samples, which are especially weak when it comes to solo strings. In that sense I don't think you have to do any of this in order to still experience a benefit beyond, say, the VSL solo strings, though yes some things will not be as authentic as when captured for real, if you don't address them.

SM is actually on sale, it's been on sale since last year and is unlikely to go lower than that from what I understand.


----------



## Syncopator (Nov 24, 2021)

Michaelt said:


> you don't even have to deal with something like the on/off bow control to get a usable result. I don't think I used it in this excerpt, it's more about specific control of phrase endings and shorter notes' behavior.


OK. That makes sense. I thought you were saying, previously, that you were operating that pedal continuously as you were playing that melody, along with the other controllers and pedal. Once I learn the benefits of that bow controller, that's the kind of thing I'd have no problem programming after the fact, or even inserting just before I record a particular phrase or passage that would benefit from it.

You're correct: SM's strings are already on sale. I should have mentioned that. I'm still curious to see what specific improvements their v2 will bring. Their current bundle also includes the ensemble strings, which I don't particularly care for. (Again, perhaps I simply haven't heard them properly performed.) Nevertheless, their current price is $360 for the solo and ensemble strings, whereas AM's current price for the solo strings is $252.

Clearly AM's price is more attractive, but we remain in the dark regarding SM's v2, and that's the kicker. I also wish SM would separate the ensemble strings from the solo strings, which might bring more parity to the pricing.


----------



## aisch1212 (Nov 24, 2021)

As everybody is testing strings with salute d'amour, here is my version of it with SM.

View attachment Salut d'Amour Op.12_FIRST.mp3


----------



## Bollen (Nov 24, 2021)

Syncopator said:


> Clearly AM's price is more attractive, but we remain in the dark regarding SM's v2, and that's the kicker. I also wish SM would separate the ensemble strings from the solo strings, which might bring more parity to the pricing.


Well technically SM is better because you get solos, chamber and full sections! Personally I find the sections better than the solos, but that's usually the case with most libraries. Have you looked into Aaron Venture? He has a string library coming out this year apparently...


----------



## CT (Nov 24, 2021)

aisch1212 said:


> As everybody is testing strings with salute d'amour, here is my version of it with SM.
> 
> View attachment Salut d'Amour Op.12_FIRST.mp3


This is nice, the only thing that sticks out to me is that the repeated notes don't feel as fluid as I'd like. Not sure how SM deals with that/what can be changed. I have the same complaint with SWAM actually.

Another thing I miss in both is some real player noise... crossed strings etc., a bit of dirt.


----------



## I like music (Nov 24, 2021)

Michaelt said:


> This is nice, the only thing that sticks out to me is that the repeated notes don't feel as fluid as I'd like. Not sure how SM deals with that/what can be changed. I have the same complaint with SWAM actually.
> 
> Another thing I miss in both is some real player noise... crossed strings etc., a bit of dirt.


Dirt definitely missing from SM. One thing that stuck out (I used to own AM, and regret selling them to be honest) is that their virtual bow (pressure, noise etc) seemed to be controllable as far as I can remember. With SM, you have a bow noise parameter, but it seems like you're just raising the volume of the bow noise if you mess with that controller. It doesn't virtually react to the string in any other way.

For some reason that bothers me. But that's one of those "it doesn't audibly bother me so much, but just the knowledge that it is just a noise and nothing more" does bother me a little.

All that said, the sound of both instruments is too clean, though I wouldn't use any other libraries out there.

I had become enamoured with the tone of SM strings (and SM brass, Infinite etc) and thought the tone was more than good enough. And then I pulled out BWW for a woodwinds comparison, and CSS and HWS for a strings comparison, and realised that what had happened was that I had listened to the modelled and semi-modelled instruments for so long, that I had forgotten all the little (important) clues that existed in "real" sample recordings, which do give them something extra in tone.

That is not to say that modelled/semi-modelled libraries don't have good tone. Most people wouldn't be able to tell them apart, and the results would be very musical. But yeah, its the grit and the dirt and the slight wonkiness that gets missed.

Still love those instruments and won't move away from them in a hurry, but yeah ... my wish this Christmas is that someone has _that_ breakthrough in their modelled/sampling tech.


----------



## Bollen (Nov 25, 2021)

I like music said:


> Dirt definitely missing from SM. One thing that stuck out (I used to own AM, and regret selling them to be honest) is that their virtual bow (pressure, noise etc) seemed to be controllable as far as I can remember. With SM, you have a bow noise parameter, but it seems like you're just raising the volume of the bow noise if you mess with that controller. It doesn't virtually react to the string in any other way.
> 
> For some reason that bothers me. But that's one of those "it doesn't audibly bother me so much, but just the knowledge that it is just a noise and nothing more" does bother me a little.
> 
> ...


Ah... A man after my own heart! You just described my exact process for the past few months. However, I will add that I've been complementing SM with CH and occasionally VSL (if I manage to make it fit) for everything that SM can't do... I also use UVI's Ircam for the more quirky bits. But SM and CH work so well together that you can mix them in the same phrase and they'll sound like the same instrument!


----------



## Fa (Nov 25, 2021)

Bollen said:


> Ah... A man after my own heart! You just described my exact process for the past few months. However, I will add that I've been complementing SM with CH and occasionally VSL (if I manage to make it fit) for everything that SM can't do... I also use UVI's Ircam for the more quirky bits. But SM and CH work so well together that you can mix them in the same phrase and they'll sound like the same instrument!


Yes this is definitely true and by the way, since almost all of us have good sampled libraries, I always encourage to mix and merge: you can get the "dirt" of some sustain and shorts out of the sampled library, and the continuous and musical expression of the SM strings inflating life and real phrasing into it. That's the best practice in my opinion: soon the new 2.01 update of SM Strings will introduce even more flexible and powerful tools for mixing (e.g. the chamber sections) and sharper sound. Really looking forward to it, since beta testing sounds very promising!


----------



## muziksculp (Nov 25, 2021)

Fa said:


> soon the new 2.01 update of SM Strings will introduce even more flexible and powerful tools for mixing (e.g. the chamber sections) and sharper sound. Really looking forward to it, since beta testing sounds very promising!


Patiently waiting for SM Strings 2.01 , Oh.. I also love Chris Hein Strings. But never thought about mixing SM Strings with CH Strings. I need to mix them and see what I get.

If anyone is layering SM Strings with CH Strings, are you using more for Solo Strings , or the Ensembles ? or both ? any feedback about blending CH and SM Strings would be helpful to read.

Thanks.


----------



## Bollen (Nov 25, 2021)

Fa said:


> since beta testing sounds very promising


Are you testing them? I haven't heard anything besides the two videos on Vimeo, which didn't really show a huge difference...



muziksculp said:


> If anyone is layering SM Strings with CH Strings, are you using more for Solo Strings , or the Ensembles ? or both ? any feedback blending CH and SM would be helpful to read.


Yeah, just for the solos so far...


----------



## muziksculp (Nov 25, 2021)

Bollen said:


> Are you testing them? I haven't heard anything besides the two videos on Vimeo, which didn't really show a huge difference...


Yeah.. I'm really interested in hearing how much an improvement 2.01 brings to the SM Ensembles.


----------



## MrTopo! (Dec 17, 2021)

SM Solo, Chamber & Ensemble Strings v2.0.1 is here!! =D


----------



## MRmusic (Jun 28, 2022)

Sample Modeling or Audio Modeling which would you chose to purchase today?


SM strings and brass is $718 USD (plus a woodwind library) 

brings you over $1,000 



Or just spend another $200 and get the SWAM all in bundle? 

What would you do?


----------



## aisch1212 (Jun 28, 2022)

MRmusic said:


> Sample Modeling or Audio Modeling which would you chose to purchase today?
> 
> 
> SM strings and brass is $718 USD (plus a woodwind library)
> ...



1. SM Strings + all brass : $ 732.59
2. AM Woodwinds bundle : $ 750
3. Aaron Venture's Infinite Woodwinds : $ 349
4. AM All-In-One : $ 1400

All SM + AM woodwinds = $ 1483
All Sm + Infinite Woodwinds = $ 1082
All AM All-In-One = $ 1400

I don't see any major difference between the costs.


----------



## Bollen (Jun 29, 2022)

MRmusic said:


> Sample Modeling or Audio Modeling which would you chose to purchase today?
> 
> 
> SM strings and brass is $718 USD (plus a woodwind library)
> ...


After hearing hundreds of demos I think, without a doubt, I would go with SM complete and possibly get AV for Woodwinds.


----------



## aisch1212 (Jul 4, 2022)

Bollen said:


> After hearing hundreds of demos I think, without a doubt, I would go with SM complete and possibly get AV for Woodwinds.


Among three of SWAM collection; strings, brass, and woodwinds, I've found best quality on the latter, in a manner of the realism. But the opinion applies to products before V3 update. Their perspective on virtual instruments no longer aligns with mine.

Alternatively, sacrificing the playability, Aaron Venture's Infinite Woodwinds is an outstanding option, even though their brass collection pales in comparison to that of Sample Modeling.


----------



## Bollen (Jul 6, 2022)

aisch1212 said:


> Among three of SWAM collection; strings, brass, and woodwinds, I've found best quality on the latter, in a manner of the realism. But the opinion applies to products before V3 update. Their perspective on virtual instruments no longer aligns with mine.
> 
> Alternatively, sacrificing the playability, Aaron Venture's Infinite Woodwinds is an outstanding option, even though their brass collection pales in comparison to that of Sample Modeling.


Agreed, but speaking as a woodwind player I find their instruments nowhere near as convincing as Aaron's which are not perfect in any way.


----------



## Rilla (Jul 14, 2022)

Tralen said:


> The problem I see with Sample Modeling, and that has prevented me from buying their products, is that there appears to be simply no progression. I can't find information about new instruments or any meaningful update, so I worry about purchasing a dead product.
> 
> The Horn & Tuba update to version 3 was in 2015. I don't know if there was any update since then, the site doesn't make it clear. The Trumpet and Trombone are even older.
> 
> I worry about investing in the Strings library for this reason, even though it is a new library.



My opinion on this, is that I don't need an update to my Selmer Super Action 80 Series 3 Alto Saxophone. I can update my playing ability by practicing, but I can't update the instrument because it works just fine. And I've had it almost 30 years. I regard Sample Modeling instruments in the same light.


----------



## jesussaddle (Aug 7, 2022)

doctoremmet said:


> (I could also have made a separate award for “best first VI-Control post ever”)


No kidding - it really surprised me.


----------

