# How do I emulate these string runs?



## Vischebaste (Aug 1, 2015)

Hi,

Could anyone give me any tips as to how to achieve the attached string sound? Of all articulations, it's the one that I've had the most difficulty emulating convincingly over the years. I think that as well as the articulation, fast velocity crescendos and diminuendos are key, but again, I don't feel as though I've quite managed to arranged these to convincingly achieve the effect on the attached clips. I'm about to start work on a project where this sound is used copiously, so it's time for me to finally nail it!
Obviously, it's also only possible to create the sound which a library allows, so if it's any help, I have the following string libraries: SF Albion I, VSL Cube (no extensions), Symphobia 1&2, EWQLSO.
Any suggestions are gratefully received 

Paul

[AUDIOPLUS=http://vi-control.net/community/index.php?attachments/string-run1-mp3.4092/][/AUDIOPLUS]

[AUDIOPLUS=http://vi-control.net/community/index.php?attachments/string-run2-mp3.4093/][/AUDIOPLUS]


----------



## Carles (Aug 1, 2015)

I've been testing for quite a while lately trying to find precisely an answer to that, not exactly runs but that agility and precision required on passages with different speeds and dynamics (I've been testing on Tchaikovsky's Nutcracker but your examples are perfect fit too) so I've been redoing my template over and over and testing many instrument combinations from all my libraries.

Still very far from the real thing, but I'm moderately happy with the results.

What it was more obvious for me was that it needs a dry approach. But... while dry libraries might sound more accurate than wet ones sonically speaking are not as convincing as wet ones.

So, layering both might works better than each one alone (and the resulting sound is not that weird as one could suspect. Not very neat for sure but still working well).

Dry libraries can play many scenarios perfectly (as far as you provide the proper CC data and you have a nice set of articulations) but even if the expression is there, it might sound smallish and unnatural.
But... none of the wet libraries I own can play such scenarios alone (not even closer to dry ones).
However, while the result of the wet ones is unclear and imprecise, it still makes a great role as "ambient" for the dry ones. 

Even more weird mix of sound could be expected by adding also solo instruments to the equation (one per their respective section) doubling those already layered ensembles. But somehow, in their proper level still works, and even by adding another solo instrument from another developer, still works! (it's a very delicate balance though, it certainly might sound as hell in some moments by just the bad contribution of only one of them, so you have to find who's the culprit and wipe that note/s from the mix).

Of course all layered versions are slightly different, not just copies of a track but each one expressed the best you can according each instrument's response and articulations set.

The point on including solos, is to add more humanization but also they are still more precise than the dry ensembles and also useful to handle the size of the wanted ensemble.
Often a solo instrument on top of a single wet ensemble can make a huge difference in terms of precision and clarity (again, in its very delicate loudness level, never revealing it as a soloist but contributing enough).

Even if both ensembles (wet/dry) are played/expressed differently, even with measuring variations, still sounds like "too many players moving the bow in exactly the same moment with exactly the same dynamic" which is unreal itself, so those "erratic" solo players could be soaring more than the ensemble "accidentally" in some moments (slightly but revealing the realistic expression that only a solo instrument can achieve) or can hold too long when the ensemble already faded out, or start a phrase with anticipation (or otherwise delay), etc. (all those things that happen with real players).

If you don't want to play each of those doubling tracks manually but you prefer to duplicate the tracks and edit the expression (as I do), tempo wise, you can also disguise that are just cloned tracks. In Cubase you can quantize your notes and again quantize but entering now a value in the randomness cell (I use between 4 ticks to 12 ticks depending on the tempo). That moves your notes slightly out the grid adding some random anticipation/delay, so applied to each copy of your original track it grants that these tracks won't play your cloned data perfectly aligned but with some margin for error, being error a very human attribute. Works nicely especially with shorts (wet instruments better to keep them perfectly quantized as wet shorts tend to be quite imprecise already without any additional "help" :D).

As said also used as a matter of ensemble size. If the dry ensemble is louder than the wet one, the apparent ensemble size becomes slightly smaller. By adding solo instruments you get an even smaller (apparent) ensemble. If you add a pair of solo sets, it becomes even smaller so the overall ensemble size depends on the balance between all of them.

That's the best technique I've found so far. Not easy to handle though and quite time consuming.

I haven't tested a combination with your libraries but perhaps you can find some analogies here.

From the combinations I've tested for these scenarios I've a template including these:
Ambient by Hollywood Strings (not a super ambient but quite agile itself), and main expression by combining: VSL Orchestral Strings (very agile/precise), VSL solos (just fabulous), Spitfire Solo Strings (not so complete/precise as VSL but with some ambient in there and nicely expressed samples) and Miroslav Philharmonik Solo strings (used the lesser, but some very nice samples too for some moments, specially violin).
I have no RAM available for other libraries so I had to find a balance between how they perform and how many resources they take. Certainly some of the above could be replaced and still would be equally functional or better. It's a matter of testing some combinations of what you have and see where it drives you.
It never will sound real anyway, but any step forward, even if smaller it surely will be welcome.

Hope it helps.
Carles


----------



## Vischebaste (Aug 2, 2015)

Hi Carles,

Many, many thanks for putting so much time into such a detailed reply, I really appreciate it! I was hoping that it would be the case of finding the right articulation, with maybe some specific technique using velocity and CC1 changes, but everything you say below suggests that there is no one solution to recreating this kind of run, but a series of steps that need tweaking and honing as you go along. I'm going to try some of the ideas you've mentioned above and see how I get on with them, I might check back into the thread with my progress.

I'd be really interested in the results of your recreation of passages from The Nutcracker, please feel free to post them up when you have something to listen to. Thanks once again for the great post!

Paul


----------



## tack (Aug 2, 2015)

Carles said:


> so those "erratic" solo players could be soaring more than the ensemble "accidentally" in some moments (slightly but revealing the realistic expression that only a solo instrument can achieve) or can hold too long when the ensemble already faded out, or start a phrase with anticipation (or otherwise delay), etc. (all those things that happen with real players)


This is, in my admittedly limited experience, very effective. I've done this exact thing a few times and these little moments end up being tiny breaths of fresh air in an a mockup that is otherwise starving for that quality of human performance.


----------



## TintoL (Aug 2, 2015)

Hi Paul,
Hi Carles,

Your examples sound very good Paul. Can I ask please how exactly you achieved those string parts? Like which articulations and what did you layered?

And thanks to Carles for his detailed answered. I follow your soundcloud channel always to listen to your work. I am amazed at how much you have improved.

I wanted to step in this discussion because I see that you both use VSL instruments. 

This type of fast agile passages and also string runs is something that I have been trying to learn how to do. And the one thing that I find is hard to do with vsl is to adjust it's tone. I am not a professional at this and I don't understand mixing and mastering that well yet.

I am specifically talking about the vsl solo strings. I find you notice the lack of realistic tone the most in this fast agile passages. A good example is LASS. I love that library, but, as soon as you move your fingers faster, you can hear how the tone and transitions fail to achieve a realistic tone.

I have been struggling to achieve a convincing sound because as you know vsl instruments are very dry. 

Can I ask you guys what exactly you guys do to the vsl solo strings to get a convincing and rich string sound? I mean how do you add EQ if you do? any exiter? how you add the reverb?

Thanks again for your help.

And Paul, I think you did a very good job on those ones. It sounds very well.


----------



## Vischebaste (Aug 2, 2015)

Hi TintoL,

If only I had actually created those, I'd be a happy man! They are short excerpts from a recording of Smetana's Moldau. These are an example of the runs that I love to be able to emulate accurately.

Paul


----------



## TintoL (Aug 3, 2015)

Thanks for the reply Paul.

We'll continue the quest to be able to do that with samples.

All the best.


----------



## reddognoyz (Aug 3, 2015)

I asked a similar question about a similar passage I had written that I couldn't get to sound right. The subtlety of the accents just wasn't there no matter what I tried, and the closest I could get still sounded laggy and drunk. Frustrating, players would read the passage and know what I was going for w/o too much difficulty I'm sure.


----------



## Vischebaste (Aug 4, 2015)

Hi Stuart,

Yes, I know what you mean about laggy and drunk. I think that the round robins are partly responsible for this effect. The timings on these particular runs need to be quite precise, but round robin randomisation can throw that out, regardless of how carefully you arrange the notes in the sequencer. You can end up chasing your tail to compensate for this. The Spitfire instruments have the ability to tweak the round robins, which helps, but still hasn't got me as close to convincing as I'd like.

Paul


----------



## wpc982 (Aug 4, 2015)

Some 'legato' instruments put a very large lag into the sound, because they read the note change, as a 'look back' to the previous note, then introduce the note transition, then only after a relatively long time put the new note in place. So they can be bad for anything clearly rhythmic, not only fast runs. 

Of the libraries I have, the most successful 'out of the box' is the Berlin Strings "Playable Runs" patches. These use the same principle, with the transitions, however, very fast (and only for major and minor seconds). The transitions also have their 'attack' truncated, so they start immediately; it appears they also use a pitch envelope to fake part of the transition. So, a good bit of smoke and mirrors, but effective as a sound. 

My own method is to use keyswitches in a midi stream (prepared in advance) rather than relying on Kontakt 'look back', so that the transition is finished at the time the new note should begin.


----------

