# Getting good results from legato strings



## bluejay (Oct 1, 2008)

Here are my two examples: -

Firstly the combined SISS and VSL violas

http://www.jamessemple.com/music/motif2.mp3

and secondly just the VSL violas from the VI SE Orchestral Strings preset

http://www.jamessemple.com/music/motif2_os_only.mp3

It did sound a lot worse with the App Violas.

cheers

James


----------



## Dave Connor (Oct 1, 2008)

Perfomance Trill is the patch you want for that as there is a built in round robin. The regular legato don't have that and so don't really work in that context.


----------



## Rob Elliott (Oct 1, 2008)

bluejay @ Wed Oct 01 said:


> Here are my two examples: -
> 
> Firstly the combined SISS and VSL violas
> 
> ...




Hey James - great examples but both I think would benefit from 'overall' dynamics swelling up and down - to avoid fatigue. These are great accomp lines for sure but can easily scream samples after just a few measures (boy - don't I know).

Try switching levels of samples in VSL with EITHER velocity - or with xfade - one time it works better one way - the next ......

If you have VSL solo strings layer in that as well (both legato and non-legato patches - playing with release times)

I too agonize of this type of alberti accomp to pull if off convincingly (also with 16 notes, same tempo - without it being too 'aggressive'.


Good luck on this.


Rob


----------



## jc5 (Oct 1, 2008)

bluejay @ Wed Oct 01 said:


> Here are my two examples: -
> 
> Firstly the combined SISS and VSL violas
> 
> ...



I feel your pain - getting this type of line to play smoothly remains one of the challenges of sampled strings.

You say the Appasionata version comes off worse? Could you post that clip by any chance?

Unfortuneatly there is little I can suggest with the VI version.. with the open format files it would have been possible to tinker with the crossfades and attacks to get things a little smoother.. :(


----------



## RiffWraith (Oct 1, 2008)

Hey James - define "lumpy". I thnk I know what you mean, but....

The biggest problem I see here is the leading E and Eb notes - they are all the same sample, and your ear (tho you may not conciously be aware of it) gets tired of hearing the same exact note (and I don't mean pitch-wise) over and over and over again. Can't you do something about that? Like, use another sample, say an F, that is pitched down 1/2 step?

If you don't mind, I'd like to take a look at the .cpr...feel free to send it to me if you'd like.

Cheers.


----------



## bluejay (Oct 1, 2008)

Hi guys, thank you for all of the suggestions here. I'm working on another project at the moment (plus a full time job) but I'll try and get that stuff for you tomorrow night (i.e. a version using App Violas plus the .cpr file for whoever wants it).

I agree that starting notes cause a problem but I can layer in other patches (maybe quiet staccati) too overcome this.

The "lumpiness" was more pronounced initially. I realise I'd already worked hard to minimise it. It's more apparent in the App Violas version. Basically the legato glisses seem to cause the phrase to become unbalanced. The notes seem to be out of sync and the glisses seem to jump out of the mix too much.

EDIT: Oh and forgot to mention that another thing in order to minimise the problem was dropping the tempo. These tracks are at (I think) 110bpm, not 120.

Anyway, thanks again, more tomorrow!

cheers

James


----------



## PolarBear (Oct 1, 2008)

My personal trick to get a bit rid of the arising fatigue is to throw in a few non-legato marcatos in, these 0.3sec or 0.5sec long short notes, usually at the start of a bow and then cancel the starting note or only use it at very low level to trigger the release note and the note transition samples.


----------



## Sovereign (Oct 1, 2008)

bluejay @ Wed Oct 01 said:


> Here are my two examples: -
> 
> Firstly the combined SISS and VSL violas
> 
> ...


Hmm, neither of these sounds like violas playing. Been a while since I used the VSL performance set, but I can confirm the string legato patches are not always as smooth as they could be.

Could you post an example with app violas?

I presume you are going for a sound more like this?
http://www.xs4all.nl/~jclmavg/motif.mp3


----------



## Hannes_F (Oct 1, 2008)

May I offer a(nother) live viola version as a suggestion?

http://www.frischat.com/compose/bluejays_violas_03.mp3

EDIT
This take has problems and as can be seen in the following discussion the tremendous guys in this forum were ready to put the finger into the wound and give some help. Thank you all! 

Result:
http://www.frischat.com/compose/bluejays_violas_HF4.mp3


----------



## Sovereign (Oct 2, 2008)

Hannes_F @ Wed Oct 01 said:


> May I offer a(nother) live viola version as a suggestion?
> 
> http://www.frischat.com/compose/bluejays_violas_03.mp3


Seems like there's a heavy chorus on it, how come?


----------



## Hannes_F (Oct 2, 2008)

Sovereign @ Thu Oct 02 said:


> Hannes_F @ Wed Oct 01 said:
> 
> 
> > May I offer a(nother) live viola version as a suggestion?
> ...



What do you mean by chorus? It is a section of 14 real violas, and each one differs slightly differs in vibrato to the other. That is why it sounds like it sounds, but no chorus effect involved. Do you listen to it on a real monitor system?

I would mix it dryer and closer normally but tried to match bluejay's reverb settings, maybe that is what irritates you.


----------



## Markus S (Oct 2, 2008)

I remember getting a good result using the Solo strings from VSL. If I remember right there is a legato program called "spiccato", maybe you can find it for the Violas? Don't forget there is an accent on the first note, not the following notes. Also note the generally the lowest and the highest strings are played "two times". Its like *G* (lowest note) D A E / E A D G /, *G* D A E / E A D G / etc. Maybe you can play this differently, but it is the easiest way.


----------



## bluejay (Oct 2, 2008)

Markus S @ Thu Oct 02 said:


> I remember getting a good result using the Solo strings from VSL. If I remember right there is a legato program called "spiccato", maybe you can find it for the Violas? Don't forget there is an accent on the first note, not the following notes. Also note the generally the lowest and the highest strings are played "two times". Its like *G* (lowest note) D A E / E A D G /, *G* D A E / E A D G / etc. Maybe you can play this differently, but it is the easiest way.



I'll look into using solo strings.

In my arps they simply go E C A C E C ... there are no repeated notes at the top or bottom. I have accented the opening notes but as Mahlon pointed out above, perhaps I should reduce the dynamic range.

cheers

james


----------



## Sovereign (Oct 2, 2008)

Hannes_F @ Thu Oct 02 said:


> Sovereign @ Thu Oct 02 said:
> 
> 
> > Hannes_F @ Wed Oct 01 said:
> ...


Of course I listened to it on a real monitor system.  

It sounds like you put a digital chorus effect on top, probably due to the fact that 14 recordings of the same viola - although you varied vibrato and such - are not dissimilar enough to get a real viola ensemble sound. Which, really, comes as no surprise. A similar effect can be found by layering similar samples on top of one another, it sounds doubled.


----------



## Sovereign (Oct 2, 2008)

bluejay @ Thu Oct 02 said:


> Markus S @ Thu Oct 02 said:
> 
> 
> > In my arps they simply go E C A C E C ... there are no repeated notes at the top or bottom. I have accented the opening notes but as Mahlon pointed out above, perhaps I should reduce the dynamic range.


At which dynamic (p, or mf?) are you playing the pattern?

If a note pops out using the vsl violas, reduce the velocity of that note a bit. The fact that playing sounds sloppy might be due to the fact that you are using slower interval patches. Doesn't App have faster legatos?


----------



## Hannes_F (Oct 2, 2008)

Sovereign @ Thu Oct 02 said:


> > It sounds like you put a digital chorus effect on top, probably due to the fact that 14 recordings of the same viola - although you varied vibrato and such - are not dissimilar enough to get a real viola ensemble sound. Which, really, comes as no surprise. A similar effect can be found by layering similar samples on top of one another, it sounds doubled.



Hmm ... you really think your example sounds better? Then maybe our monitoring conditions are very different. Mine sound fine here ... and yours, well, not at all, sorry to say. Very metallic and mechanic.

Monitoring conditions are cruxial for strings, and I am not saying mine are perfect, although I invested a lot of money and thought into the room and the system. So maybe the fault is at my end, but in my recording I still hear a decent and spacial viola section playing in a somewhat boomy room. On my system ...


----------



## bryla (Oct 2, 2008)

...


----------



## Christian Marcussen (Oct 2, 2008)

I hear the effect Sovereign is talking about as well... sounds quite strange - almost to the point of sounding out of tune. 

In fact to me the best sounding examples to my ears were James' original examples.


----------



## Hannes_F (Oct 2, 2008)

Christian Marcussen @ Thu Oct 02 said:


> I hear the effect Sovereign is talking about as well... sounds quite strange - almost to the point of sounding out of tune.



Actually they _may _be out of tune here and there - a vibrato that is slightly too big can already produce a sound that is different than what most people are used in this forum. 

Samples are produce in a way that allows the musicians to tune every single note before recording. In a real recording there are more adjustions and little corrections.

Now this is interesting, I will record a second version with smaller vibrato and would be interested whether maybe that fits more into the common taste here or that "chorus effect" is gone.



> In fact to me the best sounding examples to my ears were James' original examples.



Really. 
I mean, yes, the sound of the samples itself is recorded cleanly and processed to a certain amount ... but you would really prefer Jesses version overall? A no-variation-robotico-orchestrion-sound? Hmm ... now this is really food for thought.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Oct 2, 2008)

Those viola samples are too out of tune. I would fix that, if possible, using pitch software.


----------



## Hannes_F (Oct 2, 2008)

Ned Bouhalassa @ Thu Oct 02 said:


> Those viola samples are too out of tune. I would fix that, if possible, using pitch software.



Actually that is part of the problem. At the beginning of the recording I played along with them and then realized that they were a little off within themselves. Tried to iron that out with the other stems but appearently it did not work well enough.

Holy cow, now I really must record a new version ...


----------



## Sovereign (Oct 2, 2008)

Hannes_F @ Thu Oct 02 said:


> Hmm ... you really think your example sounds better? Then maybe our monitoring conditions are very different. Mine sound fine here ... and yours, well, not at all, sorry to say. Very metallic and mechanic.


Are you turning this into a pissing contest? :lol: And I'm not saying mine sounds "better" per se, you have the edge of playing it live which means there's no same sample repeated over and over again, which is a bonus.



> maybe the fault is at my end, but in my recording I still hear a decent and spacial viola section playing in a somewhat boomy room. On my system ...


Well I hear chorused solo violas playing on my speaker system, which to me I might add doet not sound like a real viola section. IMO of course. :wink: I also don't think GPO's system of layering solo instruments (albeit different recordings of different instruments) is that effective as a replacement for ensemble recordings.


----------



## Hannes_F (Oct 2, 2008)

Sovereign @ Thu Oct 02 said:


> Hannes_F @ Thu Oct 02 said:
> 
> 
> > Hmm ... you really think your example sounds better? Then maybe our monitoring conditions are very different. Mine sound fine here ... and yours, well, not at all, sorry to say. Very metallic and mechanic.
> ...



No. I am _really _and honestly interested into finding out what exactly happens and why. Because this is the only way of improving things. I believe that you hear a chorus and also that your example sound fine at your place. It is just that in my studio it sounds very different from every real viola section that I ever heard, at least from professionals. So maybe if we find out what is going on we can benefit both.


----------



## Hannes_F (Oct 2, 2008)

Sovereign @ Thu Oct 02 said:


> I also don't think GPO's system of layering solo instruments (albeit different recordings of different instruments) is that effective as a replacement for ensemble recordings.



Yes, but the paradigm that layering should not work is a opinion so far. Physics says that superposition of acoustical waves is a fact, that is why stereo and overdubbing work.


----------



## Sovereign (Oct 2, 2008)

Hannes_F @ Thu Oct 02 said:


> Sovereign @ Thu Oct 02 said:
> 
> 
> > Hannes_F @ Thu Oct 02 said:
> ...


Well the most sure way would be to solicit more opinions from others here whether they hear a 'chorused' sound in your example. 

I think it's an expected result of layering the solo samples. Which is what you did, right? Just to be sure I understand what you did with your recordings! 

But I'm not sure how all this is helping bluejay.  I would like to hear the VSL appasionate version.


----------



## re-peat (Oct 2, 2008)

I wouldn't call it 'chorused', but Hannes' violas recording doesn't sound good at all here either ('here' meaning: on an Adam monitoring system). 
I'd describe it as boxy, boomy, quite narrow (possible phase problems, like in a bad stereo recording that doesn't translate all that well to mono) and, yes, ... very much out of tune. Not dissimilar in fact to those unpleasant sounding Synful string ensembles. Sorry, Hannes, but that's how I hear it here and I hope it helps in analyzing the situation.

_


----------



## Hannes_F (Oct 2, 2008)

re-peat @ Thu Oct 02 said:


> I wouldn't call it 'chorused', but Hannes' violas recording doesn't sound good at all here either ('here' meaning: on an Adam monitoring system).
> I'd describe it as boxy, boomy, quite narrow (possible phase problems, like in a bad stereo recording that doesn't translate all that well to mono) and, yes, ... very much out of tune. Not dissimilar in fact to those unpleasant sounding Synful string ensembles. Sorry, Hannes, but that's how I hear it here and I hope it helps in analyzing the situation.
> _



Yes it helps, no offense taken.
Narrow: I panned them into a position where they would seat in an orchestra, so they are not all the way from left to right.

Sovereign: You are right, this thread should be about James' samples, so I will open a new topic.


----------



## José Herring (Oct 2, 2008)

James example:

The patch seems like the attacks of the samples is uneven and also you have the problem of doing ostinato with samples. Too many of the same samples repeated make it sound unusual.

Hannes:

I'd like to know how you recorded you violas. I hear a few problems that are easy to fix and would yield better results with little effort and not much money, but I need to know a few things:
What mic did you use? What preamp? And, also did you check for phase in the wav files?

best,

jose


----------



## bluejay (Oct 2, 2008)

Hi people.

Working on another project (with the client right here in the studio so I'm not getting a lot of time to post) but thanks again for the observations here.

This is just the app violas at 120bpm so about as bad as it gets. This is the same MIDI from the orchestral strings above but now we're going a little faster.

http://www.jamessemple.com/music/motif2_as_only.mp3

Thanks again.

James


----------



## jc5 (Oct 2, 2008)

bluejay @ Thu Oct 02 said:


> Hi people.
> 
> Working on another project (with the client right here in the studio so I'm not getting a lot of time to post) but thanks again for the observations here.
> 
> ...



:shock: 

Well that's just frightening.. the trouble is that the legato slur is too long for the speed of the passage, and the onset of the sustain comes too late so you don't really get to hear the note.

Which legato patch is this? I know all the VSL strings come in a 'regular' and 'fast' version - in the other packages the fast variant would be able to hande this passage decently well..


Hannes,
interesting experiment.. the end result of the sound is indeed unusual - did you manipulate the same recording of the phrase to multiply the 'players' or actually record the phrase several times over?

I'm not much of a string player, but if there were a way to get good results in this way I think I would sooner invest in more practice time and play my work rather than acquire more libs. :lol:


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Oct 2, 2008)

That's sounds plain awful. Your first example is my favourite still.


----------



## Hannes_F (Oct 2, 2008)

jc5 @ Thu Oct 02 said:


> Hannes,
> interesting experiment.. the end result of the sound is indeed unusual - did you manipulate the same recording of the phrase to multiply the 'players' or actually record the phrase several times over?



I recorded the same phrase twelve times and placed the stems in space.
I think I can get very good results but overdid it in the mix because I wanted too much ... and added too many reverb paths. Also there are some good ole intonation problems in there. Will do a better version and post it in another thread.


----------



## jc5 (Oct 2, 2008)

Hannes_F @ Thu Oct 02 said:


> jc5 @ Thu Oct 02 said:
> 
> 
> > Hannes,
> ...



I look forward to hearing your further experiments.  
Some suggestions, please disregard if you have already thought of these things:

as for reverb on the individual stems, limit yourself to early reflections to break up the positioning - only have a full reverb on the final summation to tie them all together.

Or - if you can record with a stereo pair of microphones, physically shift your playing position a bit for each take. Omni pattern microphones might help create a greater sense of space in a restricted recording area, though this will depend on the acoustics of the room.

Finally - have you ever heard of this little vst? 
http://www.cloneensemble.com/
You might want to give it a try and see how its results compare. I tried it ages ago with voice, and found that using smaller ensemble numbers (3 to 4) worked better. Perhaps in this way a line can be recorded only 3 to 4 times and then 'clone' each take? Maybe not, but interesting to see what the result would be!

best,
jc5


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Oct 2, 2008)

Here's the same figure, using a combination of SSIS Mini, Apple's Violas Leg, and VSL Chamber Violas (which I had to EQ in order to add enough brightness so they would fit with the ensembles). Expression CC used on all.

http://nedfx.com/LegatoViolaTest.mp3

PS: Don't know about their other collections, but there's a lot of dynamic and spatial jumping around in the Chamber strings, sometimes too much, imo.


----------



## Hannes_F (Oct 2, 2008)

These are the Peter Siedlaczek String Essentials Advanced Legato Violas (what a name):

http://www.frischat.com/compose/bluejays_violas_AdvancedLegato.mp3 (http://www.frischat.com/compose/bluejay ... Legato.mp3)

I think the sound is very natural, the legato is not bad, could be even tighter though. Layering with one more library or live violas would do the trick.


----------



## Hannes_F (Oct 2, 2008)

Ned Bouhalassa @ Thu Oct 02 said:


> Here's the same figure, using a combination of SSIS Mini, Apple's Violas Leg, and VSL Chamber Violas (which I had to EQ in order to add enough brightness so they would fit with the ensembles). Expression CC used on all.
> 
> http://nedfx.com/LegatoViolaTest.mp3



Sounds good in terms of legato being glued, a tad on the bright/processed side here though. Over all I think it is the best version so far.


----------



## Christian Marcussen (Oct 2, 2008)

bluejay @ Thu Oct 02 said:


> Hi people.
> 
> Working on another project (with the client right here in the studio so I'm not getting a lot of time to post) but thanks again for the observations here.
> 
> ...



Something is wrong. It should not sound like that.


----------



## Ed (Oct 2, 2008)

Christian Marcussen @ Thu Oct 02 said:


> I hear the effect Sovereign is talking about as well... sounds quite strange - almost to the point of sounding out of tune.
> 
> In fact to me the best sounding examples to my ears were James' original examples.



I liked Hannes live viola examples, but they did sound like they had some like of effect on them.  

Ed


----------



## bluejay (Oct 2, 2008)

Thanks for the examples guys ... perhaps I'll end up buying Peter's Advanced Strings after all.

I could probably get this to work by forcing VSL to use the fast legato patches. I'll have another try when I get some time.

cheers

James


----------



## RiffWraith (Oct 2, 2008)

Just had to do an *EWQLSO Plat version*.

I admit, getting repetative strings to sound realistic is a challenge.

Cheers.


----------



## Christian Marcussen (Oct 2, 2008)

bluejay @ Thu Oct 02 said:


> Thanks for the examples guys ... perhaps I'll end up buying Peter's Advanced Strings after all.
> 
> I could probably get this to work by forcing VSL to use the fast legato patches. I'll have another try when I get some time.
> 
> ...



I'm wondering. You know that the Appasionata Strings have an A/B switch between legato and portamento right? Could you have activated that by mistake? Your appationatas should NOT sound like that. 

Consider trying using the viola detaches perhaps..


----------



## bluejay (Oct 3, 2008)

Hi everyone.

Here is basically my final take on the situation...

http://www.jamessemple.com/music/motif2_final.mp3

This is a combination of the SISS violas (this time using the SIPS script) plus VSL Orchestral Violas plus VSL App Violas.

I changed the App Violas so that the legato speed was keyswitched and rather than speed-dependent. I have to say that they've been a bit of a struggle to work with and they are really temperamental. I'll probably do what Mahlon suggested and reduce the dynamic response a little.

Obviously I've just been aiming at a clean, even, legato sound here. I'll hide the repetition problems in other ways (perhaps with another patch or perhaps with doubling from other instruments).

Thanks for all of the input from everyone!

cheers

james


----------



## Sovereign (Oct 3, 2008)

RiffWraith @ Thu Oct 02 said:


> Just had to do an *EWQLSO Plat version*.
> 
> I admit, getting repetative strings to sound realistic is a challenge.
> 
> Cheers.


More like a challenge for a recording session though. 

Bluejay:

I now listened to the AOTC track 10, to get an idea of what you are after. I did not realize the "kamino" theme is a very subtle ostinato at p or pp dynamic. Obviously my mf version is not going to give that subtle sound.


----------



## bluejay (Oct 3, 2008)

Yes, fair point Sovereign. In fact my latest version is now playing too strongly.

Still I'm far from disheartened. Once this is in a mix with other instruments it'll be fine.

cheers

James


----------



## Hannes_F (Oct 3, 2008)

Who would have thought that this little thing could be an acid test. :D 

I think I can hear now what you guys mean with chorussing and phasing in my recordings. With some helpful hints by Jose I made a new version. Does this eventually sound better now?

http://www.frischat.com/compose/bluejays_violas_HF4.mp3


----------



## TheoKrueger (Oct 3, 2008)

Sounds real smooth! can't even hear the attacks, the other mp3 had a lot of volume jumps.. this is very smooth. nice sound too actually.. pretty warm and full.


----------



## cc64 (Oct 3, 2008)

@ Hannes

Now that's a good example of constructive criticism not being wasted on someone ready to listen and learn.

1000 times better than your first try!

Obviously the best version yet since it's real instruments. 

Ned's version, even thought a bit overpowering, sounds best to date for an all-sample version.

Best regards

CC64


----------



## Hannes_F (Oct 3, 2008)

Thanks guys, all of you, for giving comments and advice. You are a great bunch of musicians!


----------



## Christian Marcussen (Oct 3, 2008)

Indeed... far, far better!


----------



## jc5 (Oct 3, 2008)

Hannes_F @ Fri Oct 03 said:


> Who would have thought that this little thing could be an acid test. :D
> 
> I think I can hear now what you guys mean with chorussing and phasing in my recordings. With some helpful hints by Jose I made a new version. Does this eventually sound better now?
> 
> http://www.frischat.com/compose/bluejays_violas_HF4.mp3



A remarkable improvement!  
Very useable and opens up so many possibilities that no sample library can yet provide.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Oct 4, 2008)

Where's Steven (SVK)? He'd set us straight... :lol:


----------



## bluejay (Oct 6, 2008)

I think I've discovered that my "legato" violas may have been crossfading into portamento violas. I'll go and take another look but that would at least explain the bizarre behaviour.

I've also been blending in other patches to improve the sound. I now have a VSL solo viola and SISS con sordino legato violas.

I'll post a new version up soon.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Oct 6, 2008)

Well, I'd like to hear the two of them together, with some much-needed expression control added. There's a nasty harmonic in the attack of the first example's E that is very annoying.


----------



## RiffWraith (Oct 6, 2008)

Reegs @ Tue Oct 07 said:


> As an additional lib, here's the KH Concert Violas, default patch with legato on, followed by some VSL Chamber legato ones with a tweak to the attack envelope. For reference. Midi was dropped into piano roll, so there's no velocity variation.
> 
> http://peteroregan.com/misc/vlaquick.mp3



Wow - VERY synthetic. And I do not put that on you, Reegs. 

So far, the best version is James' last:

http://www.jamessemple.com/music/motif2_final.mp3 

Anyone disagree?


----------



## cc64 (Oct 6, 2008)

Except for Hannes' 2nd version, wich is a "no contest" because he actually used a real multitracked viola, i still prefer Ned's version wich, even though the sound is a bit overpowering(maybe because of layering and ending up with 20 violas), Ned has worked harder to have more natural dynamics between each note and also probably did not quantize as much as James. Sounds more musical to me.

Also James 2nd version is a bit washed up in too much reverb, wet/dry mix is a bit too much on the wet side.

Then again, context is very important, is this part intended to be out front or even solo or is it 1 part in a complete orchestration?

Best,

CC64


----------



## KingIdiot (Oct 6, 2008)

hmm...

I'm not even gonna get into the tangent this thread went on to 

bluejay,

Are you using SISS with Giga? Do you have Kontakt? You may want to look into SIPS and Kontakt, and converting some instruments form SISS for yourself

I have one template using SISS for violas and it sounds pretty nice in passages like this. You may want to consider lowering the dynamic range between the Xfade layers so that you can get more "play" in the harmonic differences crossfading using CC1 and use CC11 to manipulate overall dynamic expression. This allows you to stay fairly soft if you like but give some fluidity to the passage.

There are other things that can be done as well, but requires fiddling after you record/bounce the track. For instance, using a spectograph/spectrogram to hone in on specific harmonic freqs and fudge them out with high Q EQ settings to create very subtle variations in repetative notes. Like the E or the F# (You could do this to create round robin/legato notes at the sample level, but it starts to put more RAM requirements on your rig)

Also a solo viola nudged in the track with some sort of legato option would help. You could try nudging the timing of the MIDI notes around and pitch them up/down a semtone (or two) then use an audio pitching effect to retune them back and make for more variation

If this all seems liek overkill to you, then sorry. I'm just trying to suggest things that you can do with your existing libs.

All of this went for VSL in Giga format, but in the proprietary player, I have no idea whats possible. I never could afford to upgrade.

Also if you're getting better performance at faster/slower tempi Then what about rendering out and time stretching/compressing. This can even allow for some layering since you wouldnt get so much in the direct phasing issues. (Tho time stretching strings CAN give you some odd high frequency harmonics.) It all depends on the amount of stretching


Hannes yours sounds great. Something I'd float a section sample under if I wanted more girth in bigger passages... but ITS REAL so it better sound better!



Edit... did I really type more girth in bigger passages?


----------



## Hannes_F (Oct 7, 2008)

Hello all,

just for clarifiation: My second version is a mix of samples plus real viola tracks. Both components are important and complement each other in this case.


----------



## bluejay (Oct 7, 2008)

Hi people, glad that this is still generating discussion.

Funny that my previous example was considered to be too washed in reverb. I've been getting told that my recent mixes have been way too dry ... I'll take another look tonight.

Most of last night was spent finishing off a rock track but I did get a chance to work on this again. I've massively reduced the overall volumes. Unfortunately I've really had to do this at CC7 for many of the instruments because I found the VSL stuff sounded way too muddy on the lower layers. 

As for context, this is just the first part of an orchestration so I don't really have to go mad with realism. Other lines will hide this quite well.

At the moment, my final take is using: -

- SISS Violas with "Script" (which is effectively SIPS v1)
- SISS Con Sordino legato patch
- VSL Orchestral Violas from VI SE
- VSL App Violas (set to fast legato)
- VSL Solo Viola

I have quantised this but I tend to use a small (8 tick) variation between the various takes. I've also changed dynamics and expression between the various ò¦   ‡ƒË¦   ‡ƒÌ¦   ‡ƒÍ¦   ‡ƒÎ¦   ‡ƒÏ¦   ‡ƒÐ¦   ‡ƒÑ¦   ‡ƒÒ¦   ‡ƒÓ¦   ‡ƒÔ¦   ‡ƒÕ¦   ‡ƒÖ¦   ‡ƒ×¦   ‡ƒØ¦   ‡ƒÙ¦   ‡ƒÚ¦   ‡ƒÛ¦   ‡ƒÜ¦   ‡ƒÝ¦   ‡ƒÞ¦   ‡ƒß¦


----------

