# WIVI Brass 1 Professional Edition released



## Wallander (May 22, 2007)

WIVI Brass 1 Professional Edition is now available for purchase.

Brass 1 is the first instrument collection in the WIVI series. It contains a full setup of the basic instruments included in an orchestral brass section, although all instruments have been designed to fit non-orchestral settings equally well.

*Brass 1 contents*

- Trumpets 1, 2, 3 (in Bb)
_No mute, straight mute, cup mute, bucket mute, solotone mute, harmon mute/no stem, harmon mute/stem inserted (wah-wah), harmon mute/stem extended (wah-wah), plunger mute (wah-wah)._

- Tenor Trombones 1, 2, 3
_No mute, straight mute, cup mute, bucket mute, harmon mute/no stem, harmon mute/stem inserted (wah-wah), harmon mute/stem extended (wah-wah), plunger mute (wah-wah).
_
- French Horns 1, 2, 3, 4
No mute, stopped, straight mute, dynamic stop (wah-wah)._

- Tubas 1, 2 (in F)
No mute, straight mute.


For more info, visit http://www.wallanderinstruments.com_


----------



## Waywyn (May 22, 2007)

Hey Wallander,

great to hear that and good luck with the plugg 
Now I only have to wait til the IntelMAC version is ready.

Oh by the way, did I mention that your next project should be Wallander Strings?


----------



## Aaron Sapp (May 22, 2007)

Will there be an option to purchase individual instruments sometime in the future? The only thing that interests me really is the horn.


----------



## Wallander (May 22, 2007)

Aaron Sapp @ Tue 22 May said:


> Will there be an option to purchase individual instruments sometime in the future? The only thing that interests me really is the horn.


Yes there will be. But it requires us to rewrite parts of our distribution system, and we've decided to finish the Mac porting before doing that. It will probably be in conjunction with releasing some of the woodwinds.


----------



## zareone (May 22, 2007)

Waywyn @ Tue May 22 said:


> Oh by the way, did I mention that your next project should be Wallander Strings?


 
I would love to have the strings next, but it seems like the engine should be adapted for them. I vote for woodwinds next and then strings. There's a lot of people who want the strings if you read the threads here and at NSS. After the whole orchestra, I'll release other jazz and ethnic woods. 

So, I second the "give us the strings" movement!


----------



## Niah (May 22, 2007)

Wow I'm really happy to know that there are going to be released individual instruments. That's great since like Aaron I'm much interested in the horn rather than the rest of the instruments.

I'm also very confident that the woodwinds will turn out great considering the quality of this Brass 1.


----------



## Wallander (May 22, 2007)

Niah @ Tue 22 May said:


> Wow I'm really happy to know that there are going to be released individual instruments. That's great since like Aaron I'm much interested in the horn rather than the rest of the instruments.
> 
> I'm also very confident that the woodwinds will turn out great considering the quality of this Brass 1.


I agree it would be much nicer. We wanted that setup initially, but for some reason we decided to sell the instruments in packages instead. So luckily WIVI already has this functionality, it's just a matter or rewriting the watermarking and distribution system and then we're ready to go.


----------



## Wallander (May 23, 2007)

*WIVI now support polyphonic playing*






WIVI Professional Edition now has a special polyphonic mode available. The polyphonic mode can be used to make instruments automatically perform different voices when playing chords, like a smart arranger.


----------



## Christian Marcussen (May 24, 2007)

Great stuff. It's fantatsic to see your commitment to improving your player. 

A BIG + in my book. I'm still not ready to order quite yet, but I'mmonitoring your progress very closely.

8)


----------



## Fernando Warez (May 24, 2007)

It would be a great mistake not to do strings next(section strings). This technology could do wonders for strings, and that's what people want. There are plenty of threads where people complain about strings, but none about brass or woodwinds, or very few. Nail the strings and you will establish yourself, and you will sell it with the rest of the orchestra like ice creme on a hot Sunday afternoon... Why wait for somebody else to do it first. These things are like fights, more often than not it's the guy that delivers the first punch that wins the fight. 

There are quiet a few good brass and woodwind library out there. That's why i did not even bother reeding these threads. I'm not interested until you do strings simply because i have good brass already and can get good woodwinds either from VSL or Westgate. 

But i did listen to the demos. Good job! o-[][]-o Not sure about the reverb though.


----------



## zareone (May 24, 2007)

Fernando Warez @ Thu May 24 said:


> It would be a great mistake not to do strings next(section strings). This technology could do wonders for strings, and that's what people want. There are plenty of threads where people complain about strings, but none about brass or woodwinds, or very few. Nail the strings and you will establish yourself, and you will sell it with the rest of the orchestra like ice creme on a hot Sunday afternoon... Why wait for somebody else to do it first. These things are like fights, more often than not it's the guy that delivers the first punch that wins the fight.
> 
> There are quiet a few good brass and woodwind library out there. That's why i did not even bother reeding these threads. I'm not interested until you do strings simply because i have good brass already and can get good woodwinds either from VSL or Westgate.
> 
> But i did listen to the demos. Good job! o-[][]-o Not sure about the reverb though.



I agree with Fernando. Most people who are into orchestral music want, and need convincing strings. There are good sounding string libraries, like Sonivox or VSL Apassionatas, but they don't sound like the real thing. This new approach could do the job like sampling never would. But developing a string library could take really long, and I prefer the woodwinds first (that could be a matter of a couple of months) and then wait patiently for the strings, that could take like a year (I'm only speculating, since the only one who knows about it is Arne)


----------



## Niah (May 24, 2007)

Wallander @ Thu May 24 said:


> *WIVI now support polyphonic playing*
> 
> 
> 
> ...



This is awesome news !! Like Christian I'm amazed about your commitment to this project.


----------



## neoTypic (May 24, 2007)

And AI loses a bit more steam from their engine. 

I'm saving my pennies. Heh.


----------



## Ashermusic (May 24, 2007)

Personally:

1. I am not dissatisfied with the state of today's libraries. There are a lot of great choices and when you start to mix and match if you are skilled and willing to work hard great sounding stuff is possible.

2. I hope we never get to the point where if one is unskilled and/or unwilling to work hard they sound really great.

3. I hope we never get to the point where they sound quite as good as the real thing.

But, hey, maybe that's just me.


----------



## zareone (May 24, 2007)

Ashermusic @ Thu May 24 said:


> Personally:
> 
> 1. I am not dissatisfied with the state of today's libraries. There are a lot of great choices and when you start to mix and match if you are skilled and willing to work hard great sounding stuff is possible.
> 
> 2. I hope we never get to the point where if one is unskilled and/or unwilling to work hard they sound really great.



In my opinion, it's not only how good (tone wise) it sounds, I own and love Project SAM brass. The tone is really good. But the MW crossfades simply aren't reallistic, for example. With WIVI, you can do swells, crescendos, clusters, stacattos, fluttertongue, and everything you imagine, in a dynamic and expressive way.

I'm just a begginer right now, but I don't want to be a Bob Katz, my aim is to be (OK, it will never happen, I know) a John Williams. You need to have some mixing /mastering skills, but some people doesn't, but maybe they're much better composing than others (not my case, I'm not good composing nor mastering). I like mixing and mastering a lot, but for me, the soul of music is the music itself, no matter how many multiband compression it has, no matter how its frequency content is displayed in an analyser. If you listen to an all time classic in an old vinyl, it will sound REALLY bad, but if the theme is good,it'll move you.


----------



## wqaxsz (May 24, 2007)

Niah @ Thu May 24 said:


> This is awesome news !! Like Christian I'm amazed about your commitment to this project.



I third this.

good work Wallander.

regards.

Laurent


----------



## Ashermusic (May 24, 2007)

wqaxsz @ Thu May 24 said:


> Niah @ Thu May 24 said:
> 
> 
> > This is awesome news !! Like Christian I'm amazed about your commitment to this project.
> ...



Oh btw, my comment about not being dissatisfied with sample libraries was not a knock on this product, which sounds lovely. I look forward to trying a Mac version.


----------



## Ashermusic (May 24, 2007)

I'm just a begginer right now, but I don't want to be a Bob Katz, my aim is to be (OK, it will never happen, I know) a John Williams. You need to have some mixing /mastering skills, but some people doesn't, but maybe they're much better composing than others (not my case, I'm not good composing nor mastering). I like mixing and mastering a lot, but for me, the soul of music is the music itself, no matter how many multiband compression it has, no matter how its frequency content is displayed in an analyser. If you listen to an all time classic in an old vinyl, it will sound REALLY bad, but if the theme is good,it'll move you.[/quote]

1. If you are not good at composing it will not matter what the library /virtual instrument is or isn't. 

2. If one is a good composer but not good at mixing and/or mastering there are two solutions: get better through hard work, which is what I have been doing the last few yearts since my budgets have shrunk, or hire someone who is good at that.

Once again, personally I do not want improvements in the libraries/v.i.s to level the playing field between the skilled and the unskilled. Knowledge and hard work should be rewarded.

Here in this kind of discussion is usually where I get called an elistist, arrogant, a snob, egalitarian etc.


----------



## Niah (May 24, 2007)

Good libraries and Virtual Iinstruments are like good musicians, the better they are the better your music will sound. If you are too worried about libs and VST's getting too good then you are worried about your music sounding the best that it can sound.

Also the technology that we have available today is almost laughable next to the real thing, so you don't have to worry to much :D . This Brass 1 however seems to be the only shed of light that I have seen in a long time.


----------



## almacg (May 24, 2007)

If you are writing for virtual instruments, you are limited by their versatility. If you don't have the means to get a real orchestra to play your work, then you must write for virtual instruments. In my opinion, better virtual instruments _will_ make your compositions better, but only if you are skilled enough to fully exploit them.[/i]

I'm a relative beginner myself and I share your ambition Asher! I think an investment in WIVI for someone such as yourself would be a very good decision, and I personally am going to purchase it soon.


----------



## Ashermusic (May 24, 2007)

Niah @ Thu May 24 said:


> Good libraries and Virtual Iinstruments are like good musicians, the better they are the better your music will sound. If you are too worried about libs and VST's getting too good then you are worried about your music sounding the best that it can sound.
> 
> Also the technology that we have available today is almost laughable next to the real thing, so you don't have to worry to much :D . This Brass 1 however seems to be the only shed of light that I have seen in a long time.



No, the proper anaolgy is that good libraries and V.I.'s are like good instruments. A poor violinist playing a Stradivarius will make worse music than a good one playing a mediocre violin.

I am not worried about how my music sounds. I believe I can make good sounding music with whatever tools are available to me. I used to make pretty good sounding music with a Proteus Orchestral Plus, M1, and Kurzweil 100 PX.

It's the guy, not the gear.


----------



## zareone (May 24, 2007)

Ashermusic @ Fri May 25 said:


> It's the guy, not the gear.



It's both. A good engineer, will do better with good gear. If that's not true, why do lots of guys have thousands of dollars in gear? (OK, I know there's lots of gear jounkeys, if I only had the money... :roll: )


----------



## Niah (May 25, 2007)

Yes Asher that is a better analogy.

and yes I too believe that it's the guy rather than the technology.

However I believe we were talking about faithfull orchestral simulation, and IMHO right now you can be bob katz or a music scientist or work as hard as in producing your music, it doesn't really matter because with the tools available right now you will don't go far.

First and foremost we are composers and that is our deal. I'm also obsessed with sound and know a thing or two about music production but there is one thing I don't know, which is turning water into wine.


----------



## Ashermusic (May 25, 2007)

Niah @ Fri May 25 said:


> Yes Asher that is a better analogy.
> 
> and yes I too believe that it's the guy rather than the technology.
> 
> ...



Ah, and now we come to the crux of it. (BTW, great discussion.)

I do not give a fiddler's fart about how "faithful" the orchestral simulation is. I care about how good the music is and sounds and that has nothing to do with how close it is to a real orchestra. Which is why I don't care if the libraries and v.i.'s get to the point some want here.

My compostiion teacher once said, "Ornette Coleman is so creative I would pay money to go hear him break bottles on trash cans because I know he would make great music out of it."

My advice to all of you is to stop obsessing about how realistic the samples are/aren't and nitpicking every new library and v.i. that comes along (i.e. well it gets this right, but it lets down here and there) and worry about becoming better composers and engineers.


----------



## Ashermusic (May 25, 2007)

sbkp @ Fri May 25 said:


> Ashermusic @ Fri May 25 said:
> 
> 
> > My compostiion teacher once said, "Ornette Coleman is so creative I would pay money to go hear him break bottles on trash cans because I know he would make great music out of it."
> ...



Ooooohhhh, I want that library! 

Actually he probably would. He would not however pay to hear US do it with that library since we are not Ornette Coleman.


----------



## Ashermusic (May 25, 2007)

sbkp @ Fri May 25 said:


> Ashermusic @ Fri May 25 said:
> 
> 
> > My compostiion teacher once said, "Ornette Coleman is so creative I would pay money to go hear him break bottles on trash cans because I know he would make great music out of it."
> ...


Ooooohhhh, I want that library! 

Actually he probably would. He would not however pay to hear US do it with that library since we are not Ornette Coleman.


----------



## tfishbein82 (May 25, 2007)

Ashermusic @ Thu May 24 said:


> 3. I hope we never get to the point where they sound quite as good as the real thing.


Based on most of your posts in this thread, I don't see how this comment makes any sense.

You clearly feel that the technician - whether in composition or engineering - is critical to the final result. So why not have a tool that is as good as the real thing. In the hands of a hack, it would still sound bad. And in the hands of a master, it would sound wonderful and real.

What possible downside is there to the composer.


----------



## Niah (May 25, 2007)

Ashermusic @ Fri May 25 said:


> Niah @ Fri May 25 said:
> 
> 
> > Yes Asher that is a better analogy.
> ...



Jay, I see your point and I'm sorry to insist on this but...

The sad part of all of this is that the old libs and the old tools sound far better than what he have today. They have character and they sound good!

A string patch from atmosphere or even the old roland strings sound far better than most of the strings we have today. It is not a question of realism or not, I can make a real orchestra sound incredibly bad with bad players and bad sound engineering, it's a question of if it sounds good or if it sounds bad. 

It's no wonder why this Brass 1 is being praseid so much by anybody who is anybody. It's not just the outstanding technology it's the SOUND. Without the sound this technology would be completely useless.

I don't nitpick about libs, because I don't need to, the majority of them sound generally bad.  
All I ask from sample developers is something like this Brass , is that too much to ask? Don't we as customers have the right to demand such quality products like this Brass 1? I think we do.


----------



## Ashermusic (May 25, 2007)

tfishbein82 @ Fri May 25 said:


> Ashermusic @ Thu May 24 said:
> 
> 
> > 3. I hope we never get to the point where they sound quite as good as the real thing.
> ...



The downside is to the musicians. I do not want their work to totally go away so I still want there to be enough of a clear difference that when budgets permit it the choice will be real players.

Unlike some of you here I know what it is like to stand in front of some of the best musicians in Los Angeles and conduct music that you have written to picture and hear them add such nuance and musicality to it that is beyond the ability of any composer no matter how skilled to notate or certainly automate into a V.I. or sample library. 

I am a composer but I was a musician before I was a composer.


----------



## Ashermusic (May 25, 2007)

Niah @ Fri May 25 said:


> [
> Jay, I see your point and I'm sorry to insist on this but...
> 
> The sad part of all of this is that the old libs and the old tools sound far better than what he have today. They have character and they sound good!
> ...



I don't agree that "the majority of them sound generally bad."

So here we must simply agree to disagree. 

Once again, thanks for being part of great discussion.


----------



## artsoundz (May 25, 2007)

Roland strings? uh.. all these recources after all these years and they're worse?

and ..

"My advice to all of you is to stop obsessing about how realistic the samples are/aren't and nitpicking every new library and v.i. that comes along (i.e. well it gets this right, but it lets down here and there) and worry about becoming better composers and engineers."

Why not do both? 

I'll pass on the "advice" Sheesh.. ROLAND STRINGS!!!!? : )


----------



## Niah (May 25, 2007)

Yes. o-[][]-o


----------



## Ashermusic (May 25, 2007)

artsoundz @ Fri May 25 said:


> Roland strings? uh.. all these recources after all these years and they're worse?
> 
> and ..
> 
> ...



Just to be clear I did not write:
A string patch from atmosphere or even the old roland strings sound far better than most of the strings we have today."

Although frequently I will layer sampled strings with Atmosphere and the combo is gorgeous. Back in the day I used to layer my Emulator IV sampled strings with a Memorymoog or Jupiter 8 so I guess I am really partial to that kind of approach i.e., "cello-ish rather than cello."

But once again, I am not focused on trying to fool the audience into believing it is a real orchestra, just trying to make it sound as good as I can.


----------



## almacg (May 25, 2007)

I'm forced to write for virtual instruments, since I am not yet at the stage where my music is being played by real musicians. Because of this I want my orchestral mock-ups to sound as good as possible, so new technology such as this WIVI is a godsend.

I think however that VI's will never sound as good as the real thing, and indeed I hope that they never do! When (hopefully not if) I finally get work played by a real orchestra, I will not care so much about the realism of my mock-ups, but until that day comes I will continue to try and make my mockups sound as real as they can.

As Asher said, the most important thing of all is to become a better composer, not a better technician. In my experience the best way to become a better composer is to write as much music as possible, and having more usable samples helps a lot!


----------



## Frederick Russ (May 25, 2007)

Agreed.


----------



## VonRichter (May 25, 2007)

Seconded! No dissing the Roland strings people... those bad boys rock the house any time. Not only the classic "warm violins" etc, but also the cleaned up full strings patches from Peter S's original "Orchestra" library. Great stuff! If only it were still possible to buy these... some have suggested that the newer lcdx discs are missing some sounds, but nobody seems to know for sure.


----------



## IvanP (May 26, 2007)

Hey, Sorry to break the ongoing topic a bit, but I need to ask a bit of the original one 

Wallander, how many licenses do we get with the library?

I mean, could I install it on both my DAW and Laptop or should I need more licenses?

Thks, 

Iván


----------



## Wallander (May 26, 2007)

IvanP @ Sat 26 May said:


> Hey, Sorry to break the ongoing topic a bit, but I need to ask a bit of the original one
> 
> Wallander, how many licenses do we get with the library?
> 
> ...



We use watermarking instead of C/R or dongles, which means you're free to install and use it on any number of computers simultaneously, as long as you're the only one using/accessing the software.


----------



## artsoundz (May 26, 2007)

Aaron Sapp @ Fri May 25 said:


> Hey don't knock on Roland strings - the violins are better than most everything out there. That's why the Atmosphere string stuff is so nice - they use the same source material (from what my ears can tell anyway).




Truthfully, you guys know better than I on orch stuff. In a way I mispoke because I too love those Atmosphere strings. Kinda forgot about them. I was just reacting to all the absolutes in NIAH"S STATEMENT(not ASHER's) .and what was said before and after. 

And I was thinking of the sophistication of the newer libraries as opposed to building an entire orchestral score w/ strictly Roland. It must be more difficult but I'm sure a lot of the sound is there. The horns are still great as well. 

But I get it. I still like my Denny Yeager strings. just dont see anything wrong w/obseesing on better libraries AND growing as a musician/composer.

I'm going to fire up my old coal driven Sp700's and load in some syquest Roland Strings. Could be fun, actually.


----------



## IvanP (May 26, 2007)

Wallander @ Sat May 26 said:


> We use watermarking instead of C/R or dongles, which means you're free to install and use it on any number of computers simultaneously, as long as you're the only one using/accessing the software.



Thks!


----------



## billval3 (May 26, 2007)

Ashermusic @ Fri May 25 said:


> tfishbein82 @ Fri May 25 said:
> 
> 
> > Ashermusic @ Thu May 24 said:
> ...



I think a couple of things:

1. If players have to evolve in order to cope with new technologies then so be it. In another forum, someone talked about professional players learning to play EVIs. Maybe that's true. There's no reason why we should HAVE to stick with the _instrumental_ technology of the past.

2. I can only imagine that what you are saying is true about the nuance and musicality professional players can add to a piece of music. That's why I don't know that the improved sound of a library necessarily threatens the use of real players.

NOTE: I'm using "players" instead of "musicians" here because, after all, us composers are musicians as well!


----------



## billval3 (May 26, 2007)

Here's a stupid question for Wallander: How is the name of this product supposed to be pronounced?

Is it "weevee?"

Also, are you going to have a place where users can post demos? I'd like to hear more from new users. Not that I have the money to buy it right now, anyway. :cry:


----------



## Wallander (May 27, 2007)

billval3 @ Sun 27 May said:


> Here's a stupid question for Wallander: How is the name of this product supposed to be pronounced?
> 
> Is it "weevee?"



You're free to pronounce it any way you like, but that should work. It wouldn't be pronounced that way in Sweden, but that hardly matters since most customers are international.



billval3 @ Sun 27 May said:


> Also, are you going to have a place where users can post demos? I'd like to hear more from new users. Not that I have the money to buy it right now, anyway. :cry:



So far people have posted in the public forum, but maybe we should make a separate demo forum instead (we talked about this just yesterday). I'll do it right away.


----------



## Ashermusic (May 27, 2007)

[quote="billval3 @ Sat May 26, 2007 3:41 pm"I think a couple of things:

1. If players have to evolve in order to cope with new technologies then so be it. In another forum, someone talked about professional players learning to play EVIs. Maybe that's true. There's no reason why we should HAVE to stick with the _instrumental_ technology of the past.

2. I can only imagine that what you are saying is true about the nuance and musicality professional players can add to a piece of music. That's why I don't know that the improved sound of a library necessarily threatens the use of real players.

NOTE: I'm using "players" instead of "musicians" here because, after all, us composers are musicians as well![/quote]

Your #2 is why respectfullyI think your view is improperly skewed. Some things are only known through experience. But we will just have to agree to disagree here.

As for composers being musicians, well some (I think me) are fine musicians, and others.....


----------



## Moonchilde (May 27, 2007)

billval3 @ May 26th 2007 said:


> Here's a stupid question for Wallander: How is the name of this product supposed to be pronounced?
> 
> Is it "weevee?"
> 
> Also, are you going to have a place where users can post demos? I'd like to hear more from new users. Not that I have the money to buy it right now, anyway. :cry:



I prefer WhyV+eye. It reminds me of HiFi, which this library could probably be considered today, lol!


----------



## Hannes_F (May 27, 2007)

Moonchilde @ Sun May 27 said:


> I prefer WhyV+eye. It reminds me of HiFi, which this library could probably be considered today, lol!



Good idea but then it would be WhyV-eee. Wallander High Fidelity. :D


----------

