# Why can't they get solo violins right?



## mediumaevum (Feb 7, 2019)

Generally speaking, when talking about any library, I've never come across a solo violin that I cannot hear is fake. Its like all solo string instruments lack the dynamics and little things that makes a violin so special.

They do well with wind instruments. Why can't they do well with strings then?


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (Feb 7, 2019)

mediumaevum said:


> Generally speaking, when talking about any library, I've never come across a solo violin that I cannot hear is fake. Its like all solo string instruments lack the dynamics and little things that makes a violin so special.
> 
> They do well with wind instruments. Why can't they do well with strings then?



Well with Wind instruments? Well ok..if you think so.


----------



## jamwerks (Feb 7, 2019)

Embertone Joshua Bell violin. Spitfire Solo Strings,...


----------



## mediumaevum (Feb 7, 2019)

jamwerks said:


> Embertone Joshua Bell violin. Spitfire Solo Strings,...



No, I've heard those on youtube, and I can still hear a major difference between Joshua Bell, Spitfire - and a real violin.


----------



## Polkasound (Feb 7, 2019)

Because it's not a real violin. It's a series of sound recordings.

The nuances of an instrumental performance are so limitless, it would be impossible for any sample library to capture them all and script them all together for a seamless, fool-proof, realtime-like performance. It simply can't be done. You can only fit so many sustained notes, shorts, dynamic layers, articulations, sampled vibrato speeds, sampled legatos, etc. into a library.

So developers have to compromise. The result is a very good-sounding violin... one that works well enough to fool the masses and sate many VI composers with its superb sampling and advanced scripting. But to make a virtual violin (or any solo instrument) that sounds _exactly_ like a real performance by a real player is impossible.


----------



## dflood (Feb 7, 2019)

Well it's all fake unless you are in the room with the player. Even though I have some great libraries, I am much less fooled by violin and viola than other sampled instruments. Maybe I'm just more discerning since I have played some violin. However, I don't have nearly the same issues with guitar libraries, and I'm primarily a guitar player. Aside from playability and realistic articulations, we probably all have different ideas about what the perfect tone is for a sampled violin or fiddle. I prefer to hear more of the body tones and ringing after-tones in the samples, probably because when you play the violin your ear is just inches from the sound so you hear a lot of the bow and body 'noises'. Whatever sample processing the developers have to do to get legato samples to flow together sweetly at any note length, these tones seem to be lost. I tried a little test the other day with one library: I selected a single legato sample and played it dry through in an audio editor. At the end of the note there was just nothing. I selected a staccato sample and this time there was a clear and resonant ring from the body after the note - much more convincing, at least in isolation. Although I'm not positive, I concluded that this is perhaps why legato passages seem a bit more lifeless to me.

I agree with @Polkasound that we are a long way from 'is it live or Memorex?'. Possibly the next advances will be in physical modelling, where the user will be given much more dynamic control over the actual tone of the instrument by being able to 'dial-in' more convincing timbral parameters, dynamically adjust the bow direction, speed, and pressure, vibrato speed and depth, etc. Of course, Audio Modeling strings can already do that but I feel they still have more work to do on the overall tone of the instruments.


----------



## mediumaevum (Feb 7, 2019)

Thanks @Polkasound and @dflood, for the explanation. I think we'll just have to do better scripting, mixing and other stuff that makes it sound more like real violins, without ever reaching 100 % authentic sound.


----------



## SimonCharlesHanna (Feb 7, 2019)

Yeah I gave up and found an amazing session recorder for strings. So much better.


----------



## Zero&One (Feb 7, 2019)

Listening to naked samples/comps you can hear. However, in the right hands and within a well mixed track I think you'd struggle with a blind test. And that's where these samples belong and shine.


----------



## FriFlo (Feb 7, 2019)

Depending on what instruments you play and/or know really well, no sampled instrument will ever pass as realistic to you. It also depends on a given melody/phrase what passes as realistic ... but really! Nothing ever is great in the world of ismstruments compared to the real thing. If you think, a sampled oboe sounds like the real thing, then you should realize, your concept of what an oboe sound like is really limited and probably spoiled by listening to to many mockups. 
Then, there is another side of the story ... strings are generally the most delicate instruments with the most nuances a human ear - partially also an untrained ear - is able to perceive. I give you one thing to compare to: have you ever heared a solo singer (maybe classical style) legato patch, that doesn't sound unconvincing? Maybe, it is usable being covered in some fat arrangement ... but on its own, it will always sound artificial, right? Well, that is because everyone more or less knows how a singer is supposed to sound like! It is the human voice and even non-musicians have a good idea of how that is supposed to sound.
Well, some people's idea of how the Violin should sound like may be as detailed. Others might have a much better idea of the clarinet ... and yet other people about a whole lot of instruments and for them, really any mockup cannot fool them, however well it is made.


----------



## Greg (Feb 7, 2019)

Yes they all require insane amounts of eq. But if you do it right and tuck it into a nice reverb, you can get away with most basic melodies


----------



## dflood (Feb 7, 2019)

I agree there can be moments where a solo string library can sound (almost) real, but the longer and more complex the piece, the more the VST gives itself away. I can’t always tell with string ensembles though, although no doubt others can.

Still, I’m grateful for how far we have come. For years I ignored midi and sampled music because it sounded so fake and lame. Now it’s good enough that a carefully prepared arrangement of sampled acoustic instruments can sound good enough for non pros that they don’t even question the source.


----------



## SoundChris (Feb 7, 2019)

Well I think most people just dont really dig deep enough into their tools (?). You really can get very close - maybe not 100% but IMO 90-95% - to the real thing. I also played violin for many years myself on a decent level and have to say that I was (and stil am) quite impressed how realistic sampled (solo-)strings can sound.

I did that track within about 2 hours playing and testing the Josh Bell Violin in a short demo track which was taken as official demo by embertone back then.



This isn´t even ultra-deeply edited / programmed and could probably stil be done more believable and accurate. It was just performed on the keyboard and improved with some articulations using keyswitches. No external effects or anything - just the sound out of the box. I personally think that the transition at 1:02 might sound a little bit unnatural (maybe I should stil fix that) but that was my fault editing not 100% correctly. I am a huge fan of this library (and no - I wasn´t paid for the track and yes I purchased the library for the full price  ) and do think it sounds quite realistic. That is why I am curious to know and understand what doesn´t sound right so I could probably try to fix that aspect. Sure a virtual instrument will never get totally on par with a real performer (not just strings. It is the same thing with any instrument you could think of). But I believe these tools already do the job quite well. Which moments do sound synthetic to you? Do you think the samples / recordings per se are sounding not realistic and are the problem?

Or here another example:


Like I said - even it might be not 100% realistic: does it really sound THAT fake to your ears that you would say there is a massive problem compared to the real thing? IMO the technology and degree of realism especially of this library (and probably some others out there) is stunning and satisfying?


----------



## DocMidi657 (Feb 7, 2019)

I would like to see development go in a different direction. I don't know/think we can ever get "real time" emulation of say a violin or any acoustic instrument when using an 88 note piano keyboard and samples or physical modeling. There's just too much in the hands of the musician going on even with trying to do it with controllers, aftertouch, ribbon controllers, pitch/mod wheels and foot pedals. What I would like to see is a virtual instrument developed that lets you play in your phrase with no lag/delay and nice touch/response with a sound that's "kind of close" but after it's recorded you then select what you recorded and click the "make it real button" and then it turns the midi data into a performance that sounds like a real instrument played by someone really good. That would be a breakthrough for us! Kind of like giving a part your wrote to a really good player.


----------



## Michel Simons (Feb 7, 2019)

I would give my third testicle for a "make it good" button.


----------



## Vik (Feb 7, 2019)

SoundChris said:


> I did that track within about 2 hours playing and testing the Josh Bell Violin in a short demo track which was taken as official demo by embertone back then.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



This sounds more than good enough for what I want sampled instruments for. If I want to make it sound like real players, or for recording compositions that shall be sold as having real players on them, I'll use real players anyway.


----------



## SimonCharlesHanna (Feb 7, 2019)

SoundChris said:


> You really can get very close - maybe not 100% but IMO 90-95%


You've done as good a job as you (or anyone else) could with these I am sure but 95% - no way. Perhaps a better way to put it would be that it's fine for 95% of the audience/clients out there.

Aside from the legato bumps (prevalent in most libraries) and vibrato randomness, the main tell is the lack of direction or intention - when a musician plays, they understand the piece as a whole, each section and each note's part in that piece. Solo string VSts all sound uncomfortable, shakey, uncertain etc.

To me the difference is night and day:


----------



## Zero&One (Feb 8, 2019)

SimonCharlesHanna said:


> Perhaps a better way to put it would be that it's fine for 95% of the audience/clients out there.



But isn't that the goal we want? The people paying and enjoying for music/film/tv don't really care if it's real or not. As long as it sound ok.

I remember playing sweep arpeggios at 1000mph on the guitar one night, only one person said "man that was cool" (another guitar player). 10 mins later another guy played 3 out of tune jangly chords an wailed Gun and Roses over it. People everywhere were like "whoah dude... why you not signed?!"
95% of people don't care... the other 5% are on forums and my old gig :D


----------



## GtrString (Feb 8, 2019)

They dont have to sound real, they just have to sound reel!


----------



## Lionel Schmitt (Feb 8, 2019)

IMO there are solo violins that sound more realistic than all full violins sections patches.
There is no Joshua Bell equivalent for ensemble violins.
The Spitfire Performance patches come kinda close, but still so far away... CSS is great for slower passages, but it would be laughable to compare the playability of CSS and Joshua Bell.
So I'm not sure why solo violins are being picked out.

It's just a general thing. A bunch of wav samples and scripts don't fully replicate real musicians. DAMN - shocking realization of the day!!!


----------



## SimonCharlesHanna (Feb 8, 2019)

James H said:


> But isn't that the goal we want?


Keep lowering the bar and it makes you (and instrumentalists) much easier to be replaced with AI.

Also your analogy is imo inapplicable in this situation. You're talking about technique vs technique and to be honest claiming one is superior is an issue. Whilst I can appreciated shredding and its technical accomplishments, I personally don't enjoy it musically and I am sure many other don't either.


----------



## Chr!s (Feb 8, 2019)

SimonCharlesHanna said:


> Keep lowering the bar and it makes you (and instrumentalists) much easier to be replaced with AI.



We live in a horrible time where objective beauty standards are completely absent because the dominant philosophy of the modern world is "nothing has any meaning other than that which you choose to impart on it."

Thus, mediocrity reigns supreme.

Just layering even a single live performance over samples can make an enormous difference. Nowadays, I find myself less concerned with "what libraries to buy" and "who do I know that can maybe play this?" and buying IRL instruments myself.


----------



## Zero&One (Feb 8, 2019)

SimonCharlesHanna said:


> Also your analogy is imo inapplicable in this situation. You're talking about technique vs technique and to be honest claiming one is superior is an issue. Whilst I can appreciated shredding and its technical accomplishments, I personally don't enjoy it musically and I am sure many other don't either.



I never claimed one was superior. However, out of tune is never a good technique.
My point was nobody cared.


----------



## Rowy (Feb 10, 2019)

mediumaevum said:


> Generally speaking, when talking about any library, I've never come across a solo violin that I cannot hear is fake. Its like all solo string instruments lack the dynamics and little things that makes a violin so special.
> 
> They do well with wind instruments. Why can't they do well with strings then?



Try Chris Hein Solo Violin.


----------



## erikradbo (Feb 10, 2019)

Where is the wenn diagram!?!


----------



## MA-Simon (Feb 10, 2019)

My friends don't hear the difference.
Yeeeeeears ago when I was starting out they thought my libraries sounded like the real thing. (Halion Symphonic Orchestra)
I have updated to new string ~4-5 times, they can't tell, only I can.
When I say that these new trings have this vibrato and those new transition sample techniques etc., they just look at me weird. It is all rythm and melodies to them, they don't care if something sounds real or synthy.
And there really is no reason for them to care. Both are viable soundtrack options.

I do agree though, it is never the amount of vibrato & feel I want in the moment of writing. So I compose with the samples in mind.


----------



## YaniDee (Feb 10, 2019)

Here is a comparison of legato..


----------



## Mr. Edinburgh (Feb 10, 2019)

because you can't replicate a real player mate


----------



## Parsifal666 (Feb 10, 2019)

Chris Hein is the best I've ever owned. It can take tweaking/warming up, but I like to think it sounds really good.

Of course, I'm not as much of a stickler for realism. I saw how dumb pretending vis were authentic a long while back (dumb only imo, more power to anyone going for that). 

Some would argue that achieving intense expressivity in practically any orchestral instrument is a fool's game because the context of the performance has been taken away. Players, especially those who really like your piece (though true pros are consistently more than competent as a necessary rule) will play your music miles better than the folks hired to record a bunch of orchestral samples. That's why, ultimately, if you truly want your music to be played the way you're hearing it you should aim, financially, mentally..._*holistically*_, to have it played by live (or recording) players.

We can fool our families and friends (I should say casual music listeners). But imo virtual composers should accept that they're writing for an objective instrument (or set of) whose player(s) were in a context that had _*nothing*_ to do with your composition.

I think that might be why vis are getting so popular in the area of music-with-radically-attenuated-dynamics. There's a limited range in music like action trailers (not just), dubstep (or should I say Rock and Pop in general, though I happen to love a lot of the latter two), and other genres that vis can represent perfectly. It's when you're looking for something in the order of the first movement of Mahler's 9th that we are, and looks like will continue to be, fucked. For fun/frustration, try it. Even harder: try Beethoven's opus 132, third movement. There's just too much nuance there, a significant portion of which of which is created via the live performance of said piece. It might be the greatest day in virtual instruments if someone can pull off such a mockup...I personally won't lose sleep waiting for it, folks.

Imo just write, write, write, with a big side order of studying up on both music and your vis. Perhaps not worry so much about power legato and how x sounds like shit whenever I do x. I really believe consistent, _religious_ composing will make you better regardless. It pays off so much, at least it has for me.

Just get things to sound the best they can be, and let me tell you if the day comes when your writing is performed by instrumentalists you will be so happy (I was, still am).

Hokay, well that was _kind_ of on topic lol! Sorry for my Wagnerian longwindedness.


----------



## Parsifal666 (Feb 10, 2019)

James H said:


> But isn't that the goal we want? The people paying and enjoying for music/film/tv don't really care if it's real or not. As long as it sound ok.
> 
> I remember playing sweep arpeggios at 1000mph on the guitar one night, only one person said "man that was cool" (another guitar player). 10 mins later another guy played 3 out of tune jangly chords an wailed Gun and Roses over it. People everywhere were like "whoah dude... why you not signed?!"
> 95% of people don't care... the other 5% are on forums and my old gig :D



To me, if I'm satisfied with the sound I'm just going to take that ball and run with it. Because said satisfaction can be a source of terrific inspiration to me and makes me _*want *_to write and not worry so much about da tweak.


----------



## Zero&One (Feb 10, 2019)

Parsifal666 said:


> To me, if I'm satisfied with the sound I'm just going to take that ball and run with it. Because said satisfaction can be a source of terrific inspiration to me and makes me _*want *_to write and not worry so much about da tweak.



Yeah totally. Some of my most unpolished material still sounds the best, as it captured that initial spark. I later ruin it faffing on until 4am


----------



## Fredeke (Feb 12, 2019)

Some instruments aren't meant to be played on a keyboard. It's amazing what library developpers already achieve, in transposing wind or string instruments to the keyboard, but until we get a MIDI controller in the shape of a violin, we might never be able to play violin emulations realistically.

(Though the continuous keyboards seem somewhat promising...)


----------



## mikeh-375 (Feb 13, 2019)

Chr!s said:


> We live in a horrible time where objective beauty standards are completely absent because the dominant philosophy of the modern world is "nothing has any meaning other than that which you choose to impart on it."
> 
> Thus, mediocrity reigns supreme.
> 
> Just layering even a single live performance over samples can make an enormous difference. Nowadays, I find myself less concerned with "what libraries to buy" and "who do I know that can maybe play this?" and buying IRL instruments myself.



So true Chr!s. Standards of beauty are inculcated by standards of appreciation, which in turn are inculcated by standards of attainment - it's all relative I suppose these days. Sometimes I feel the age of the dumbing down and instant gratification has a lot to answer for.
Quite right imv too, that even one soloist will lift samples onto a new plain of expression and musicality.


----------



## Parsifal666 (Feb 13, 2019)

mikeh-375 said:


> So true Chr!s. Standards of beauty are inculcated by standards of appreciation, which in turn are inculcated by standards of attainment - it's all relative I suppose these days. Sometimes I feel the age of the dumbing down and instant gratification has a lot to answer for.
> Quite right imv too, that even one soloist will lift samples onto a new plain of expression and musicality.



One of the reasons I don't do concerti (beside the fact that that genre isn't a favorite of mine) is because, unless I can hire at _*least*_ the lead solo instrumentalist to record his or her parts, I'm screwed. Concerti require a LOT of feeling from the solo performer in particular (not to mention the painstakingly mapped out interaction_* between*_ instruments)....I haven't heard anyone get this genre to sound anything like the real deal, even with an assortment of elite-quality vis.

I guess all this could be summed up with: know your limits with vis, and maybe spend less time being concerned with realism when in this day and age many musicians (yes, even bedroom Volk) in the know will spot your vi usage in a heartbeat.

Just write it.


----------



## mikeh-375 (Feb 13, 2019)

Parsifal666 said:


> One of the reasons I don't do concerti (beside the fact that that genre isn't a favorite of mine) is because, unless I can hire at _*least*_ the lead solo instrumentalist to record his or her parts, I'm screwed. Concerti require a LOT of feeling from the solo performer in particular (not to mention the painstakingly mapped out interaction_* between*_ instruments)....I haven't heard anyone get this genre to sound anything like the real deal, even with an assortment of elite-quality vis.
> 
> I guess all this could be summed up with: know your limits with vis, and maybe spend less time being concerned with realism when in this day and age many musicians (yes, even bedroom Volk) in the know will spot your vi usage in a heartbeat.
> 
> Just write it.



Last year I recorded a clarinettist for my clt. concerto. The transformation from mock up to live was astonishing for the music and its impact. I also recorded a string trio a few years back, but didn't bother mocking it up, because I knew it would be off-putting at the writing level. On hearing the end result, I was glad I relied on my musical wits and manuscript rather than a DAW because I was unbounded by sample limitations and could write using my full technical and musical abilities.


----------



## Parsifal666 (Feb 13, 2019)

mikeh-375 said:


> Last year I recorded a clarinettist for my clt. concerto. The transformation from mock up to live was astonishing for the music and its impact. I also recorded a string trio a few years back, but didn't bother mocking it up, because I knew it would be off-putting at the writing level. On hearing the end result, I was glad I relied on my musical wits and manuscript rather than a DAW because I was unbounded by sample limitations and could write using my full technical and musical abilities.



Hey that's terrific! The live performance has that certain presence that's difficult for me too describe. And Mike is right, when you hear your mock up performed live...it's like living years and years with a black and white television, then someone drops a colour one into your lap.

That's not to down vis (I personally love them), it's just that I think a lot of people who are serious about their compositions are best off knowing all sides pertaining to their use.

Grab the latest stuff if you want, just don't do it in the name of advanced realism...things can only get so "real" when those sample-recording musicians have only a general idea of how you want something played.

That said, and as I mentioned earlier, for things like mockups and Pop music vis can be devastatingly effective imo.


----------



## Zero&One (Feb 13, 2019)

Must be an amazing moment listening to your music performed live. Like you say, impossible to put into words. Magical maybe?
I remember watching Homay's face when she listened to their music being performed for the SA Inside the Score. That feeling again!
I can only relate to playing live gigs, but it's different as I was concentrating on my own performance and not tripping over the monitors (or dodging cabbages).


----------



## mikeh-375 (Feb 13, 2019)

James H said:


> Must be an amazing moment listening to your music performed live. Like you say, impossible to put into words. Magical maybe?
> I remember watching Homay's face when she listened to their music being performed for the SA Inside the Score. That feeling again!
> I can only relate to playing live gigs, but it's different as I was concentrating on my own performance and not tripping over the monitors (or dodging cabbages).



Magical and yet a little scary. Even though I know my onions, there was always a lot of money riding on getting things right, just enough to make a small part of me quiver with anticipation and nervous excitement. Recording my own personal music is so much easier and relaxed. Boozers helped enormously after sessions....


----------



## Parsifal666 (Feb 13, 2019)

mikeh-375 said:


> Boozers helped enormously after sessions....



MANDATORY!


----------



## Wolf68 (Feb 13, 2019)

- I think it depends how much time and effort you put into the midi workout. it's all about putting the right Expression into the right context, it always depends on the Musical Phrase you're in. and a violin is a _very_ expressive Instrument.
- we have nowadays very good violin sample libraries. compare that with - let's say lets 15 years ago.
- it also depends on, which Instrument you Play, I think. me as a former Cellist I am very picky on strings. but indeed, with woodwind and brass midi Rendering results I can live quite good. so it probably depends how good you know the Instrument.


----------



## robgb (Feb 13, 2019)

I posted a version of this elsewhere, but I think this is a pretty damn good solo violin (my sloppy performance notwithstanding):

Audio Modeling violin.

[AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/violin-mp3.18440/][/AUDIOPLUS]


----------



## JPQ (Feb 15, 2019)

To me best like embertone stuff is fine based demos but generally i think is related how expressive and how keyboard instrument violin is.(its fully becouse pitch is stepless for example and you can play at least 13 common ways i think)


----------



## Hasici (Apr 7, 2019)

Hmmmm.. but you play your fake violin on keyboard right? Violin is hard instrument to emulate due too many degrees of freedom... It takes a heck of editing to turn a keyboard played violin into something that sounds like a violin, regardless how good the patches are.
And the Joshua Bell violin is a great sampled library.

To get properly sounding violin you need a modeled violin and a controller that can work the model such as roli or something even weirder. But there is the issue...current modeled violins don't have proper "wood" sound and ambience of sampled violins and sampled violins can't work the necessary parameters... so we need some sort of hybrid violin and played on special controller. No money for such a niche, especially when good violin players are everywhere.

And then there is the question why? Why do you want a fake violin so badly to sound like the real violin that even violin player could not tell?

Many violin libraries are good enough to be acceptable by majority of listeners. Listeners usually don't bother with questions - is it real or is it fake violin.Just is your music good or bad.
If you need a precise violin for solo, just hire a violin player.


----------



## bill5 (Apr 11, 2019)

mediumaevum said:


> No, I've heard those on youtube, and I can still hear a major difference between Joshua Bell, Spitfire - and a real violin.


I wouldn't call a youtube video (esp if you are listening on PC speakers) the best of light to judge.

I haven't looked at them in depth yet, but suspect you can get close to the real thing. Obviously the real thing is best, but that can be said of any instrument. 



Polkasound said:


> But to make a virtual violin (or any solo instrument) that sounds _exactly_ like a real performance by a real player is impossible.


I disagree. Assuming that is by "exactly" you mean "even the best of trained ears can't tell the diff." We just aren't there yet. Tech has already gotten beyond what many considered impossible years ago in this regard. There's no reason to think that just because we aren't there means we never will be. And I admit that notion doesn't wow me and part of me hopes that's wrong. We like to think the real thing will always be a cut above...and for me for reasons other than the sound, it is. I will never go to a concert and watch some guy or band playing iPads or otherwise not playing real instruments (I can live with some backing stuff on a MIDI keyboard). But in terms of the actual sound? The gap has already shrunk considerably. Hard to say timelines, but I would be very surprised if it did not continue to shrink...



Hasici said:


> And then there is the question why? Why do you want a fake violin so badly to sound like the real violin that even violin player could not tell?


?? Why would you NOT want that?


----------



## Polkasound (Apr 11, 2019)

bill5 said:


> Assuming that is by "exactly" you mean "even the best of trained ears can't tell the diff." We just aren't there yet.



Yes, that is what I mean when I say "exactly." A cheap violin library will fool 99% of the general public, and the best violin libraries will fool the other 1% as well as many musicians, but no violin library will fool a highly-experienced violinist. The ears of experienced musicians are honed over time to hear their instruments in more detail and intimacy than anyone else. The same can be said for people who are closely associated with those instruments, such as conductors and composers. That's why some kid just getting into composing music for video games might go gaga over a new brass library whereas a classical horn player could find the same library rife with so many problems, he'd deem it unusable.


----------



## bill5 (Apr 11, 2019)

As it stands now, no doubt. Going forward? Who knows? But there's no basis to call it "impossible."


----------



## Polkasound (Apr 12, 2019)

My statement about it being impossible wasn't concerning future development of virtual instruments. I'm sure as technology progresses, libraries are only going to get more realistic.


----------



## bill5 (Apr 12, 2019)

Oh OK thanks for clarification - so you meant people using it won't ever be able to use it in a way that is realistic enough that the trained ear couldn't spot it?


----------



## Polkasound (Apr 12, 2019)

bill5 said:


> so you meant people using it won't ever be able to use it in a way that is realistic enough that the trained ear couldn't spot it?



I didn't say "won't ever". I said "can't".

As far as the future goes, I think it's safe to say that virtual instruments will become more realistic, and they will fool more and more musicians along the way. But will exposed, solo performances of, for example, virtual violins and saxophones ever fool virtuoso musicians who have been playing the real instruments their whole lives? My guess is no, or at least not for a long time yet. The technology to virtually recreate all of the infinite nuances of acoustic instrumental performances doesn't yet exist, but who knows? It may someday.


----------



## bill5 (Apr 12, 2019)

That's quite a back-peddle from "to make a virtual violin (or any solo instrument) that sounds _exactly_ like a real performance by a real player is impossible." 

 Just messing with you. And again I hope your initial statement is correct. I just fear it isn't, given current trends. With luck it will be after people like me are gone though.


----------



## Polkasound (Apr 12, 2019)

Well, I have to admit I've been a little confused by your replies over the past couple of days because I still can't tell if maybe you were misinterpreting my posts and we're actually on the same side on this issue. I've been maintaining the same point of view through the entire thread, which is that a good VI composer could compose something with a virtual violin, but a virtuoso will know it's not real. It may fool a sax player, or a piano player, or a drummer, but _not_ an experienced violinist. It just can't be done. Not by today's technology. A violin performance is comprised of infinite sonic nuances that no library can mimic. Most libraries fool the public. Some get close enough to fool other musicians. But none can fool an experienced violinist whose ears are trained to hear those nuances.

I'm sure modeling technology will develop over the years, and it will make for some amazingly heightened realism beyond what we have now. But I won't speculate much as to who will be fooled by virtual instruments in the future. We'll just have to wait 'til we get there.


----------



## bill5 (Apr 13, 2019)

Yeah, I think I took your initial "impossible" post to mean "it can't ever be done" vs "it can't be done_ today_." The coming year with tech in music will be interesting, maybe in ways both good and bad.


----------



## Vik (Jan 28, 2020)

mediumaevum said:


> Why can't they get solo violins right?


Because getting a violin to sound right/great simply requires a lot of work (and that includes real violins too).


----------



## SupremeFist (Jan 28, 2020)

Vik said:


> Because getting a violin to sound right/great simply requires a lot of work (and that includes real violins too).



At bottom it's because the "user interface" of a violin or tenor sax or solo electric guitar is just vastly more rich and complex than the user interface of a keyboard and drawing lines in midi.


----------



## ism (Jan 28, 2020)

I can’t seem to find the episode where they describe how to sample solo violinists, but this one covers (skip to 0:47) how to play the flute at a level reminiscent of the current state of the art in solo strings sampling:


----------



## ism (Jan 28, 2020)

SupremeFist said:


> At bottom it's because the "user interface" of a violin or tenor sax or solo electric guitar is just vastly more rich and complex than the user interface of a keyboard and drawing lines in midi.



Really the amazing thing isn’t they can get it right, but that they can do it at all.


----------



## TimCox (Jan 30, 2020)

A big part of it is you can't hear the bow in the libraries


----------



## John Longley (Jan 30, 2020)

I think If you're willing to bleed for the programming you can trick somebody well enough. The cost/benefit of the time needed is another matter. I think since a violin performance has no many moving parts it breaks down at the input level, more than the samples.


----------



## vitocorleone123 (Jan 30, 2020)

To date, sampled violin solos seem light years ahead of sampled viola solos.

still lots of room across the board for improvement


----------



## shawnsingh (Jan 31, 2020)

Whoops pressed send to soon ok my earlier post, deleted that one. 

As a violin player myself (except I'm scared to admit how long it's been...) I have some thoughts here.

The key problem is that continuous parameters are a fundamental part of the sound. I think it's the same reason that voice is so hard too. On the opposite extreme, this is why percussive instruments are easier to sample. Most of the sound that most people hear about it comes from a one shot hit, which beautifully matches midi note-on and note velocity paradigm.

For strings, continuous parameters are things like bow speed, bow pressure, vibrato rate and depth, exact intonation, etc. It's not just a "set it and forget it" thing to figure out when sampling... The way they *change* is the part that people recognize as a violin sound. So maybe a sample out of context can sound great. But in a musical line, it matters a lot the timing of when vibrato kicks in, how the player should move the bow - what would sound continuous and natural is probably not what separate samples would sound like sequenced together. This problem still exists even if a library goes into deeply sampled legato and progressive vibrato and phase free velocity layers, even if they model up and down bowings and even if they go as far into modeling like AudioModeling. humans are just accustomed to hearing all the parameters being modulated in just the right way in a real performance - both physically realistic and musically appropriate. Without some next gen scripting or AI, there's no deep sampled instrument that could fill in those parameter decisions to fit the music and physical constraints yet.


----------



## Cinebient (Jan 31, 2020)

Funny is the most interesting on-screen thing i saw yet is a tiny iOS app called Finger Fiddle. It does not sound real at all and not even as good as most new solo violin sample libraries and the physical modeling engine also is maybe not as good as something like SWAM etc. but the way you can control the sound is the closest to a real violin. You just move your bow in real-time, add pressure, get closer to the bridge, you morph seamless (more or less) between articulation, speed, timbre etc.
So almost like SWAM f.e. but in a much more natural way. This combined with a really next level physical modeling engine (or a hybrid) could be interesting. 
I still also find all the physical modeling tools sound still much more fake as most better sample libraries for me while they offer a much better expression, performance in theory. 
Maybe in 10-20 years the cpu power is there. But indeed i see these tools more happening on these mobile devices with much better on-screen play possibilities without a need of thousand controllers....but then it might be as hard to play these tools as learning the real violin. And so i´m happy that i can play with these great solo instruments today with good enough results. 
F.e. i personally found a lot virtual performances more interesting as some real players i heard. Of course that depends on the player and song etc. Then there is the right room and position. 
It is of course also a huge different (at least for me) to hear a recorded real violin performance or sitting in front and hear it live. It is night and day. 
But if you think about what was there for 10-15 years i guess it only can get better.....


----------



## Rodney Money (Jan 31, 2020)

I personally believe all solo instruments suffer concerning realism especially when exposed in melodic lines. For me, it’s so much easier to fake realism with full instrumental sections or sections layered with a soloist. For example, there’s no way I can get a trumpet solo library to sound like this:


----------



## nilblo (Feb 1, 2020)

I really hope that VI:s never reach the level of being good enough to fool the esteemed people of this forum. Why would anyone want that? Certainly the sampled instruments of today are capable of driving your imagination and thus nourishing your creativity when composing. The Joshua Bell Violin is a huge leap from a Sound Canvas Violin (I started out on that crappy soundcard..) Personally, I´m more worried about the AI that compose orchestral music the way Beethoven would have done it. (Really, it doesn´t but some people will believe it does ...) When The Bottom Line as in Controlling Costs And Increasing Revenues, is all that counts, a lot of people here are going out of business. Music should allways be performed by musicians. When performed by CPU:s & softwares, for composers ears only. In my opinion.


----------



## lelepar (Feb 13, 2020)

Cinebient said:


> Funny is the most interesting on-screen thing i saw yet is a tiny iOS app called Finger Fiddle. It does not sound real at all and not even as good as most new solo violin sample libraries and the physical modeling engine also is maybe not as good as something like SWAM etc. but the way you can control the sound is the closest to a real violin. You just move your bow in real-time, add pressure, get closer to the bridge, you morph seamless (more or less) between articulation, speed, timbre etc.
> So almost like SWAM f.e. but in a much more natural way. This combined with a really next level physical modeling engine (or a hybrid) could be interesting.
> I still also find all the physical modeling tools sound still much more fake as most better sample libraries for me while they offer a much better expression, performance in theory.
> Maybe in 10-20 years the cpu power is there. But indeed i see these tools more happening on these mobile devices with much better on-screen play possibilities without a need of thousand controllers....but then it might be as hard to play these tools as learning the real violin. And so i´m happy that i can play with these great solo instruments today with good enough results.
> ...



Have you ever tried controlling SWAM with Pen2Bow?









Audio Motion Instruments







www.youtube.com


----------



## Stringtree (Feb 13, 2020)

Having dated a violinist, I'm painfully aware of what a real violin sounds like. No, but seriously, I heard a track the other day and said, "Oh, Heifetz." Unlike many instruments, characterful and personal nuances are part of the sound. 

Somebody posted a new violin, and in a couple seconds, I said, umm, no. Either it was the way that it was approached on the keyboard, or the baked in vibrato, and it was a no-sale.

VSL's clarinet was a true revelation, because I play clarinet. Here's something that's pretty good. Then the Herring Clarinet came along and made switching articulations easy. If you can play idiomatically, breathe every so often, this can sound incredible. What a great piece of work. 

The JB Violin has so much intelligent programming. It also has the raw materials there to program. I think the quality level will go up in terms of what the VI offers to the performer in the future. 

We're all waiting for the Embertone cello, right? And the viola. 

What was that thing, Synful? That was impressive because it wasn't locked to samples, but geared toward expressivity. This is an interesting thread. Sample modeling has a lot to offer.

Oh, I agree. There's no foolin' when hearing a nekkid solo instrument like a fretless-stringed one. Even guitars are cheese-wiz, because the direct action is in the fingers, and they are attached to the brain and heart by infinitessimal distances. 

Whee. 


Greg


----------



## nolotrippen (Feb 13, 2020)

At least sampled saxophones sound realistic/sarc.


----------



## Stringtree (Feb 13, 2020)

There's always Sensual Sax. (cough) In a pinch, no, sorry, in a mix, it sounds vaguely saxophonish. 

The 8dio stuff is okay. Then there's the Swing and Swing More sample vault. But yeah, I'm not hearing Coleman, Getz or Coltrane at my fingertips. There's just too much idiolectic breath coming out of those dudes. Man, I wish I could, but it's probably better I buy a student instrument and do it myself, bad as it would be as a clarinet player. 

Greg


----------



## JohnG (Feb 13, 2020)

it's pretty easy to find a violinist online who's willing to record for you, and a solo performance doesn't cost very much (compared to, say, an orchestra).

So if you write for solo instruments, I think it's worth it to your art to hire a real player and make it sing.


----------



## Stringtree (Feb 13, 2020)

YaniDee did a terrific comparison. But my heart just sank through each competitor in the comparisons. It's like taking a plant through some sort of weird wilted plant competition. Each sacred line has to be held up with toothpicks and shepherded through its shortcomings in order to sound like a person, living and breathing, to make it to the judging round. 

To be fair, he didn't feed it a piano roll. He actually played it, and that was awesome. But each instrument is its own thing that needs propping up, CC manipulation, gentle teasing, to sound real. How much time that would've taken!

Is the goal to sound real? Hahahaha... Yeah, I had a Proteus with the Orchestral plugin thingy. Yes, it should sound real. That's what makes the thing tickle the sacred and make a schlub like me feel like I'm playing an orchestra on a keyboard. 

There were some standouts. Some sounded raspy and made me want to rip my eyebrows off. Some were close. The dead giveaway is a vibrato that goes weeeEEEEeeeeEEEEeeee and won't stop. 

Please kill meh. 


 Greg


----------



## nolotrippen (Feb 13, 2020)

Stringtree said:


> I had a Proteus with the Orchestral plugin thingy.



I had all the Protei. Some big-name film composers also had them. They sounded amazing…for the time. The Proteus 2 had an entire orchestra crammed into 8 megs (forget about articulations). It wasn't done with a high-sampling rate or even long samples, but it was still an impressive feat -- amazing engineering.


----------



## Stringtree (Feb 13, 2020)

Noooo, I didn’t mean to disparage the venerable Proteus line; that was not my intention at all. It was expensive and standalone. But it never did produce solo instruments that sound anything like the ones people are talking about here. My bad. Yes, it was a step above general hardware samplers because it was really the orchestra in a box I dreamed of. 

Greg


----------



## JohnG (Feb 13, 2020)

I thought at the time that the Proteus sounded terrible. I used Eric Persing's Roland orchestral library instead, with a stack of SP700s.


----------



## Stringtree (Feb 13, 2020)

I listened to an early attempt, boy did I feel like Beethoven with wild hair when I first heard it. Oh, so far beyond the piano, I was composing! Unmusical note lengths, detached, no, disembodied musical phrases that coiled up from within a cistern. 

I think things started getting better when I treated each line like I was a different player, and doing a performance. 

SP700s were ungodly expensive, JohnG. And more for memory! 

Soundfonts were the first glimmer of hope. Took a lot of work, but the results exceeded in quality the all-in-one-box solutions. 

It echoed my experiences with playing in bands. I never had a roots rock keyboard until the Nord Electro 4, and that was toward the end. But ARP, Juno, Moog Opus 3, DW8000. Those were cheap. 

Couldn’t produce a piano or B3 for nuthin. 

The laptop could! Sorta. 

Greg


----------



## thesteelydane (Feb 17, 2020)

SimonCharlesHanna said:


> You've done as good a job as you (or anyone else) could with these I am sure but 95% - no way. Perhaps a better way to put it would be that it's fine for 95% of the audience/clients out there.
> 
> Aside from the legato bumps (prevalent in most libraries) and vibrato randomness, the main tell is the lack of direction or intention - when a musician plays, they understand the piece as a whole, each section and each note's part in that piece. Solo string VSts all sound uncomfortable, shakey, uncertain etc.
> 
> To me the difference is night and day:



Hey, that’s Stepan Grytsay! I was in the 2011 YouTube Symphony with that guy. Man, he’s come a long way!


----------



## SamC (Feb 29, 2020)

MA-Simon said:


> My friends don't hear the difference.
> Yeeeeeears ago when I was starting out they thought my libraries sounded like the real thing. (Halion Symphonic Orchestra)
> I have updated to new string ~4-5 times, they can't tell, only I can.



Same with me. I’ve actually had clients use the mockup instead of waiting for the live recording because they can’t tell the difference.
[/QUOTE]


----------



## SimonCharlesHanna (Feb 29, 2020)

nilblo said:


> I really hope that VI:s never reach the level of being good enough to fool the esteemed people of this forum. Why would anyone want that? Certainly the sampled instruments of today are capable of driving your imagination and thus nourishing your creativity when composing. The Joshua Bell Violin is a huge leap from a Sound Canvas Violin (I started out on that crappy soundcard..) Personally, I´m more worried about the AI that compose orchestral music the way Beethoven would have done it. (Really, it doesn´t but some people will believe it does ...) When The Bottom Line as in Controlling Costs And Increasing Revenues, is all that counts, a lot of people here are going out of business. Music should allways be performed by musicians. When performed by CPU:s & softwares, for composers ears only. In my opinion.


Ill hear no more ill talk about Sound Canvas!


----------



## Peter Williams (Mar 3, 2020)

SimonCharlesHanna said:


> Ill hear no more ill talk about Sound Canvas!


This is one of those Yes and No topics. We respond to beauty and we search for beauty. Realism is that relative idea, based on context and also upon expectation. I've heard capable, live players who just don't sound good to me, and some old VSTs that occasionally sing. The latest violin vsts are magical at times. As a fairly capable violinist who has lost the ability to play do to nerve damage, I am lucky to have the new vst and sampling technology to work with. However, I don't run to the computer every chance I get in order to fiddle around. There are many reasons for that, even though I am only partially aware of them. It's the tactile element, and missing an old friend, even though we drove my housemates crazy with our constant noodling. Then there's room ambiance, portability, the ability to rock out with a blazing, sweetly distorted solo in a concert hall, which I was fortunate enough to do from time to time. And yes, in it's day, the Sound Canvas was a revelation, and LA synthesis still can sing.


----------



## starpainter (Apr 20, 2020)

mediumaevum said:


> They do well with wind instruments. Why can't they do well with strings then?


Euhm, no. Being a woodwind player, all of em are just too obvious really. And being a 'non violinist', I actually find they come 'pretty close' with a violin sound.

See? The thing is, the more you actually master the real instrument, the more you realise the samplers are 'fake'. Sure they can be tweaked for ages and ages, but that is still tweaking, and that is actually engineering things, not playing things.

I'd say: don't try to fool people. So what if it doesn't sound perfect. Does it sound the way you would like it to sound though? Isn't a sampler, a librarie, a synthetic thing, ... a completely different instrument, and not a copy of an original, because that copy will always lose out to the original.


----------



## Ashermusic (Apr 21, 2020)

nilblo said:


> I really hope that VI:s never reach the level of being good enough to fool the esteemed people of this forum. Why would anyone want that?



I have often written the same sentiments.


----------



## SamC (Apr 21, 2020)

nilblo said:


> I really hope that VI:s never reach the level of being good enough to fool the esteemed people of this forum.



I don’t think it’s musicians and composers on forums you should fear being fooled. Unfortunately a lot of the VI’s are already fooling the clients — I’ve had situations where clients have placed the mockup instead of the recording because they couldn’t tell the difference or production music libraries start licensing out the mockup before it’s been recorded because they think its basically the same thing.

The sad truth is, a lot of clients don’t care. Whatever sounds good and is cheaper. Luckily there are plenty of clients who care about music sounding real and alive and the enhanced viewing experience that comes from that!

VI’s are getting amazing but still don’t hold a candle to the real thing in my book!


----------



## Living Fossil (Apr 21, 2020)

SamC said:


> VI’s are getting amazing but still don’t hold a candle to the real thing in my book!



What i alway found really interesting was the following test:

Play a recording of a real musician to somebody who knows about sampled instruments and tell him that he is hearing a performance rendered with samples.
Then ask him if he could tell you, if he wouldn't know, that it's not a real musician but just samples.
I've done this test dozens of times, often with interns, to get an impression about the way persons react to this constellation.
With one single exception everybody could immediately tell that the supposed sample based performance was completely different from a real performance. Not few got really upset and almost aggressive by the shear heresy of presuming that some sh*tty samples could be meant to sound real.
So, thinking they hear samples, it was perfectly clear to them that they don't hear real musicians.
It helped me a lot in getting a better understanding of the human psyche.

Said this, let me add the following: of course there is a huge difference between a great musician playing music and something carelessly put together with samples. But still, there are (rather few) situations where samples are better. And there are situations where the combination is best.
What almost never works is rebuilding music written for a real orchestra with samples.
All those renderings of Beethoven Symphonies, Le sacre etc. are proof.
However, there are lots of music written for samples which simply sound better that way than with a real orchestra.
I often think of composers who - having few access to real orchestras - wrote for the organ, compensating the "real thing" by this historical instrument that had many registers faking real instruments. Lots of great music came into existence this way...

And finally: in my personal view, a real orchestra with a bad intonation is a terrible thing.
Except for situations where it's so bad that it gets a new quality.
But usually, bad intonation is a terrible thing...


----------



## SamC (Apr 21, 2020)

Living Fossil said:


> I often think of composers who - having few access to real orchestras - wrote for the organ, compensating the "real thing" by this historical instrument that had many registers faking real instruments. Lots of great music came into existence this way...



I think for me, I’ve been writing “for” VI’s out of necessity for so long that it’s moulded the way I approach my music. I’ve found it so valuable to hear my mockups transformed by live players because it makes me realise the limitations of samples/my own writing and just how limitless the possibilities of an orchestra are. Texture, colours, articulations, sound disturbing the air in such a way — we aren’t really there yet with samples.

I also think the lack of live recording in production music creates a “sameness” in the market. It’s everyone using the same half a dozen string libraries and articulation patches.

I work my butt off to create the best sounding mockups I can and every time I’m blow away by the live players. Even very simple music just breaths life.

Of course there will be times when the VI has certain moments you think feel better and it’s dependent on the orchestra. Luckily I’ve only ever worked with great players.


----------



## ism (Apr 21, 2020)

SamC said:


> Of course there will be times when the VI has certain moments you think feel better and it’s dependent on the orchestra.



True. But it's also a bit like a stopped clock being right twice a day.


----------



## SamC (Apr 21, 2020)

ism said:


> True. But it's also a bit like a stopped clock being right twice a day.



Well sure, the orchestra could easily do it but it’s just due to time. The amount they record in a day is ungodly (for production music in my experience). One or two extra takes and it’d be 100% perfect.


----------



## Lionel Schmitt (Apr 21, 2020)

In the whole "why can't they get instrument X right" line of thought it should be pointed out (if not done already, but worth repeating) that everyone has different sensibilities towards different instruments.

I for instance find solo violin libraries generally more convincing than ensembles. Maybe that's because I listen to a ton of music with orchestral strings and little with solo violin. For some people pianos are lacking - I'm generally happy with a piano with 3 dyn layers, no RR while I'm barely ever happy with any other type of library, the larger the ensemble the worse it gets for me.
I'm also quite easily satisfied with guitar libraries, especially electric guitars. Probably because I don't listen to much music featuring them prominently. If it would be the other way around I'd probably be easily satisfied with orchestral libraries and very critical about guitars.

So, in a nutshell - depending on your sensibilities and thus discernment you'll find different instrument groups to be more or less convincing as sample libraries. So there is no point in generalized "instrument X sucks more as samples than instrument Z".


----------



## robgb (Apr 22, 2020)

You will never be able to get the sound of real solo instruments unless you play a real solo instrument, The good news is that most listeners won't know the difference.


----------



## Peter Williams (Apr 22, 2020)

I'm glad that the virtual instruments are getting better, more versatile and more numerous. They can't replace live, acoustic performance, but they can approach that goal, coming ever closer to attainment of that ideal over time. In time, some virtual instruments will develop sonic characteristics that significantly extend the language of their acoustic counterparts. Along with that, new controllers and actuators will expand the technical capabilities of performers, along with the expectations of listeners. The groundwork for this has been developing for some time. All that is needed is for cultural acceptance to take root for the new sounds and the new virtuoso. It will happen.


----------



## Sears Poncho (Apr 22, 2020)

DarkestShadow said:


> I for instance find solo violin libraries generally more convincing than ensembles.


I'm working on a track for chamber orchestra-size strings and rock band. It's off the charts difficult. It's going to be a combo of fake and real strings. I have the fake ones down. I used a combo of section and solo strings.

One of the fake violinists plays several wrong notes, so does one of the viola players.  There are chords at the end that need to be really tight. I messed up and the first violins are off by a 16th note for one. I'm leaving it. 

I used LCO strings as the "core", it's mainly a fast piece with lots of short notes. LCO strings are rough and not always pristine with rhythm. Perfect. There's another spot where the violins are legato and I forgot to keyswitch one. Sounds stupid. I'm leaving it. IMO this is the stuff that can make it more real, because this is what happens in a real orch. I know one violinist who is always behind when he plays pizz, and I know another who rushes like mad when it's a fast passage. It all kinda comes out in the wash.... but "programming" stuff like this in can really be another way of looking at things. Going through the first violin part and picking notes here and there and changing them to the wrong note? Try it. It's jarring at first, but when it all comes together it works.


----------



## Thundercat (Apr 22, 2020)

Sears Poncho said:


> I'm working on a track for chamber orchestra-size strings and rock band. It's off the charts difficult. It's going to be a combo of fake and real strings. I have the fake ones down. I used a combo of section and solo strings.
> 
> One of the fake violinists plays several wrong notes, so does one of the viola players.  There are chords at the end that need to be really tight. I messed up and the first violins are off by a 16th note for one. I'm leaving it.
> 
> I used LCO strings as the "core", it's mainly a fast piece with lots of short notes. LCO strings are rough and not always pristine with rhythm. Perfect. There's another spot where the violins are legato and I forgot to keyswitch one. Sounds stupid. I'm leaving it. IMO this is the stuff that can make it more real, because this is what happens in a real orch. I know one violinist who is always behind when he plays pizz, and I know another who rushes like mad when it's a fast passage. It all kinda comes out in the wash.... but "programming" stuff like this in can really be another way of looking at things. Going through the first violin part and picking notes here and there and changing them to the wrong note? Try it. It's jarring at first, but when it all comes together it works.


No performance is ever perfect, and it sounds wrong when it is. When I record midi parts, I try not to quantize too much. It takes the soul out of the performance. We think of tempo as this rigid thing that we have to adhere to, rather than merely the suggestion that it really is...that every note has to be right in time, yet quite often the nuance is in the subtle spreading out of the tempo, the gentle and intuitive slow down that is almost impossible to create using DAW tempo curves. The gut human response is the music, and the structure sometimes kills that.

I bet your work sounds terrific. Thx for sharing.


----------



## SimonCharlesHanna (Apr 23, 2020)

One thing I wanted to perhaps add (a year later) which happened while I was at film school: 

We were watching a short film and after, the director told us about all these small details that 99% of the audience would likely not notice, and a student asked "why bother if no one will notice?" 
The Director's reply was "audiences wont be able to necessarily put to words how the small details (subtext) affects their perception of the narrative, but they will certainly *feel *it"


----------



## GNP (Apr 23, 2020)

Never ever quantize MIDI strings. Even when you have to, to eventually print parts for live players (IF you can afford live players), I always duplicate the MIDI part for quantizing, and mute those.


----------



## Living Fossil (Apr 23, 2020)

GNP said:


> Never ever quantize MIDI strings. Even when you have to, to eventually print parts for live players (IF you can afford live players), I always duplicate the MIDI part for quantizing, and mute those.



Besides that i disagree (it always depends on the context) i will just leave this here – posts #3 and #5 are quite interesting :






Hans Zimmer's Discombobulate from Sherlock Holmes *FINAL VERSION*


Here's my second piece of work. I'm using a few movie scores as study tracks to understand the composition of them, music theory, mixing and mastering etc, and a Cubase 6.5 newbie so a fairly hefty learning curve! My first track was Danny Elfman's Ice Dance from Edwards Scissorhands...




vi-control.net


----------



## GNP (Apr 23, 2020)

Living Fossil said:


> Besides that i disagree (it always depends on the context) i will just leave this here – posts #3 and #5 are quite interesting :
> 
> 
> 
> ...



HZ says it's the percussion and horns that's quantized. And this one sounds very MIDI-esque. I know his style of ultimate regimentation of sharpness of the rhythm (lol he's always like that), but even when I desire that effect, it's fine if it's rhythmic. But if I'm doing a slow, emotional passage, quantizing is really a bad idea.


----------



## Living Fossil (Apr 23, 2020)

GNP said:


> HZ says it's the percussion that's quantized. And this one sounds very MIDI-esque.



I have no intention to discuss this further or to mention that you forgot to quote the word "especially" or to point you to the timing of some strings in Dark Knight etc. 
If you like sloppy timing in music that is supposed to sound tight, that's of course your very personal decision and I'm sure it's good for you.
I just have an aversion against generalisations where they aren't accurate.
And i also have an aversion against musicians who can't play a proper tempo rubato. But that's a different story...


----------



## gamma-ut (Apr 23, 2020)

I think it's a fair generalisation that, in the main, 100% quantising isn't great. There's going to be a natural push-pull in the metrical structure that makes sense when performed live that isn't going to be reflected in the notation directly. However, what feels like human playing rather than machine can often be down to emphasis rather than timing swing, which is why a lot of "humanising" functions for drums tend to miss the mark. Drummers are often very good at hitting the time, but the subtle adjustments made to hit position and force make all the difference. And it's the kind of thing that gets away from the machine-gunning you might otherwise find.


----------



## GNP (Apr 23, 2020)

gamma-ut said:


> I think it's a fair generalisation that, in the main, 100% quantising isn't great. There's going to be a natural push-pull in the metrical structure that makes sense when performed live that isn't going to be reflected in the notation directly.



Yes, exactly my point. Particularly when it comes to strings.


----------



## Living Fossil (Apr 23, 2020)

gamma-ut said:


> Drummers are often very good at hitting the time, but the subtle adjustments made to hit position and force make all the difference.




Yes, and i can tell you there is a *huge *(or should i say "ultra-gigantic") difference between musicians who have that feeling for groove that allows them to play the perfect deviations that perfectly fit the music and some random sloppy timing... there is quite a bit of research and literature on the topic since the 80ies.


Now, with some libraries (e.g. SSS) you have the issue that even if you quantize 100%, the music won't feel that much quantized, since the editing of the samples wasn't that perfect at all.
With VSL strings on most articulations (not on all) a too strong quantisation usually will sound too sterile, because they did a very careful job.
And just to avoid misunderstandings: I'm not saying you should quantize in all situations.
But a generalisation like "never ever" is just simply wrong since it leaves out the scope of situations that may require other tactics.


----------



## gamma-ut (Apr 23, 2020)

Absolutely with you on that level of generalisation.


----------



## Ashermusic (Apr 23, 2020)

While I am sure it’s similar in other DAWs, in Logic Pro X quantiziing can be done in an artful and subtle way that the listener would never know, using Q-Strength and Q=Range.


----------



## Thundercat (Apr 23, 2020)

Ashermusic said:


> While I am sure it’s similar in other DAWs, in Logic Pro X quantiziing can be done in an artful and subtle way that the listener would never know, using Q-Strength and Q=Range.


Will this be in your upcoming book?


----------



## Ashermusic (Apr 23, 2020)

Thundercat said:


> Will this be in your upcoming book?



Certainly, but briefly, as it is a beginner’s book.


----------



## Dracarys (May 20, 2020)

I think he's talking about overall Timbre and not playability. Spitfire and Berlin sound like synths to me. IMO the best right now are probably Embertone, Nocturne Series, and Cinesamples. Other smaller companies have some good solo strings that sound nice in the right mix. 

I've always wondered why certain libraries can't get the tonal quality/timbre right, even with simple legatos and sustains. CS also has that scratchy synth sound, CSS being a bit better. What's happening in the recording and conversion process?


----------



## Dilovardus (Jul 8, 2020)

Er


SoundChris said:


> Well I think most people just dont really dig deep enough into their tools (?). You really can get very close - maybe not 100% but IMO 90-95% - to the real thing. I also played violin for many years myself on a decent level and have to say that I was (and stil am) quite impressed how realistic sampled (solo-)strings can sound.
> 
> I did that track within about 2 hours playing and testing the Josh Bell Violin in a short demo track which was taken as official demo by embertone back then.
> 
> ...




very Nice Played and sounds incredible good!


----------



## Pando (Jul 8, 2020)

mediumaevum said:


> Thanks @Polkasound and @dflood, for the explanation. I think we'll just have to do better scripting, mixing and other stuff that makes it sound more like real violins, without ever reaching 100 % authentic sound.



"Sound" is one thing, the other thing often overlooked is "performance", which I think is a more important factor. You could have a very capable VST with all the scripting and articulations, but the result is still unrealistic if the person using it can't articulate it properly and who doesn't understand all the nuances that really makes the violin sound the way it does. It takes a lifetime of practice and skill to play the real thing, and the performance is really intertwined with the player's physique; every player sounds different even playing the same violin. Someone playing on a keyboard with the mod wheel really can never quite get there even if the "sound" is the same.

I learned to play the real thing for 7 years when I was young and never touched it again after I was done. I hated handling and playing the damn thing. But I absolutely love to listen it sing on the hands of a capable and talented musician.


----------



## Peter Williams (Jul 8, 2020)

Pando said:


> "Sound" is one thing, the other thing often overlooked is "performance", which I think is a more important factor. You could have a very capable VST with all the scripting and articulations, but the result is still unrealistic if the person using it can't articulate it properly and who doesn't understand all the nuances that really makes the violin sound the way it does. It takes a lifetime of practice and skill to play the real thing, and the performance is really intertwined with the player's physique; every player sounds different even playing the same violin. Someone playing on a keyboard with the mod wheel really can never quite get there even if the "sound" is the same.
> 
> I learned to play the real thing for 7 years when I was young and never touched it again after I was done. I hated handling and playing the damn thing. But I absolutely love to listen it sing on the hands of a capable and talented musician.
> [/





Pando said:


> "Sound" is one thing, the other thing often overlooked is "performance", which I think is a more important factor. You could have a very capable VST with all the scripting and articulations, but the result is still unrealistic if the person using it can't articulate it properly and who doesn't understand all the nuances that really makes the violin sound the way it does. It takes a lifetime of practice and skill to play the real thing, and the performance is really intertwined with the player's physique; every player sounds different even playing the same violin. Someone playing on a keyboard with the mod wheel really can never quite get there even if the "sound" is the same.
> 
> I learned to play the real thing for 7 years when I was young and never touched it again after I was done. I hated handling and playing the damn thing. But I absolutely love to listen it sing on the hands of a capable and talented musician.


It is a very demanding instrument, and also addictive. I studied and worked at it a lot as an adult, performed in rock and jazz settings for a few years. Then one day my spinal stenosis gave me a pinched nerve in the neck, which gave me numbness and pain in my left hand, making it impossible to play for any length of time. So I'm very grateful that the virtual instruments have improved to the extent that they have.


----------



## Rasoul Morteza (Jul 8, 2020)

If anyone has had any experience with the UVI IRCAM Solo Instruments, please let me know. It looks intriguing. 









UVI IRCAM Solo Instruments 2 - Avant-Garde Solo Instrument Collection


16 instruments, 550+ playing techniques, experience unparalleled depth and detail with classical and avant-garde articulations recorded at IRCAM Labs




www.uvi.net


----------



## nolotrippen (Jul 11, 2020)

Rasoul Morteza said:


> If anyone has had any experience with the UVI IRCAM Solo Instruments, please let me know. It looks intriguing.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


ditto, but no haters


----------



## MariGea (Jul 12, 2020)

mediumaevum said:


> Why can't they do well with strings then?



Intonations and expressions I think is the reason. It is exactly why you can always hear (at least for now) if it is real human talking or "google, alexa, siri, etc". There are unnatural stops in phrasing, weird faded notes in the middle of phrase, strange and off pitches, often I hear very odd interlays especially in legato. To get good violin library to sound "almost" life like, one must play violin or other string instrument on a decent level and have full control to what is happening inside of every note (vibrato and intonation specially!). And of course some people have naturally expressive speech and pretty voice timbre and others training for years and years to get same result, same goes for violin - one does not simply hear the "right" intonations to express it, takes a lot of time and listening to the masters.


----------



## Kevin Thurman (Jul 14, 2020)

No sampled bowed strings or winds can really ever sound completely realistic. But I think the difference between close to realistic and completely unrealistic is 90% on the user and not the instrument in most cases.


----------



## Iskra (Jul 14, 2020)

mediumaevum said:


> Why can't they do well with strings then?


Because it's incredibly difficult, I'm afraid impossible.
There are just sooooo many nuances on a solo instrument that are impossible to replicate with samples, unless someone record 3M samples of a solo violin, and even then, the control of those samples would still be unpractical for programming. The amount of huge and tiny differences a violinist (or violist, or saxophonist) can make into just one note is staggering. Plus, every player has their own sound, their own way to vibrato, their own way to attack the notes, the cleanliness and articulation of the notes is different...
Still, for some applications, for pop productions, using certain articulations (usually the shorter ones), some solo strings are ok. But we're still a galaxy far away of making a mockup of Debussy cello sonata or any Brahms' string quartet that sounds realistic. 
In a section, all the small details of each note or each legato line is a bit blurred and 'equalized', and that's why sample libraries of sections work better. For solo instruments - strings, but also reeds and brass- there are too many nuances on a solo performance.


----------



## Glen Brown (Jul 14, 2020)

For me, VirHarmonic's Bohemian Violin comes very close. The fact it changes all the articulations for you is an added bonus - sound great with little to no effort in programming. Perfect for getting inspiring lines down fast.


----------



## nuyo (Jul 15, 2020)

I don't know but to me the free Solo Violin from Performance Samples sounds very convincing. If you don't want it to play some professor sh#t it sounds very good.
In my opinion the developers haven't been able to get the cello right. It always sounds clunky and I completely avoid using Solo Cellos in my music.


----------



## Tom Auger (Aug 10, 2020)

Hello! First post here. I picked up NI's Stradivari a few weeks back during its intro sale and have just been blown away. Not having worked with a lot of sampled solo instruments before, I'm not sure how this specs up to some of the other heavy hitters, but boy have they don't a good job to create an immediately playable instrument with nothing more than an expression control required.









STRADIVARI VIOLIN


The distinctive sound of a rare, one-of-a-kind instrument from the world’s most renowned violin maker, Antonio Stradivari. Extensive performance features, 20 articulations with up to three legato transitions each, and multiple mic options deliver nuanced, expressive parts for modern productions.




www.native-instruments.com





Would love to hear from you all how this specs up to others you may have used. I hope they come out with a Cello version. I would buy it the day it came out.


----------



## Marsen (Aug 15, 2020)

I don't understand this discussion at all.
If you wanna have a violin near to realism in your piece, you're happy to use these wonderful vst's like Joshua Bell, Bohemian, or what ever you prefer.

If your piece, isn't able to use a vst to translate the true beauty of your composition, imho you have two choices to take: Change the instrument ( to ukulele?), or get a good violin-player!
Seriously, if you have a paid job to be done, then be sure to get paid enough to get the real deal!


*love the Ukulele


----------



## Striking Parallels (Sep 29, 2020)

Rasoul Morteza said:


> If anyone has had any experience with the UVI IRCAM Solo Instruments, please let me know. It looks intriguing.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I’ve had it for about five years, thinking I would use it for the more “outre” sounds—multiphonics, scratchy strings and the like. So far I haven’t really used it much. It takes time to blend the UVI instrument to the to the sound of main Solo instrument track (usually an Embertone, Chris Hein, VSL, etc.). But the sound is good, not too “special” color, ambience, and such. At this point I’ve done this enough that it’s usually worth the trouble. The price is fair, and the UVI player is staightforward, though you have to do the setting up and each instance only has four slots. I would never buy this for a workhorse library and it’s not for composers who love that EPIC SOUND; but if you are even a LITTLE adventurous (that’s me!) it’s maybe a great resource. I’ve tried to mock up flute multiphonics and it takes all day and still sucks the big one.


----------



## reddognoyz (Sep 29, 2020)

They can't get solo violins right because you can't program intent


----------



## Tom Auger (Sep 29, 2020)

Tom Auger said:


> Would love to hear from you all how this specs up to others you may have used. I hope they come out with a Cello version. I would buy it the day it came out.



The ARE coming out with a full suite of solo strings in fact (sadly, not included with Komplete except for the "big kahuna" collection).

I don't have any experience with any of the other established solo string libraries out there - are there any members of this forum who can compare them for me? I've actually seen indications that others aren't as impressed as I am...


----------



## BradHoyt (Sep 29, 2020)

Parsifal666 said:


> Chris Hein is the best I've ever owned. It can take tweaking/warming up, but I like to think it sounds really good.
> 
> Of course, I'm not as much of a stickler for realism. I saw how dumb pretending vis were authentic a long while back (dumb only imo, more power to anyone going for that).
> 
> ...


A note regarding the Chris Hein violin. To my ears, it sounds kinda like the violin is in a tunnel. It's entirely likely that it's just me...


----------



## John Longley (Sep 29, 2020)

BradHoyt said:


> A note regarding the Chris Hein violin. To my ears, it sounds kinda like the violin is in a tunnel. It's entirely likely that it's just me...


Which one?


----------



## BradHoyt (Sep 29, 2020)

John Longley said:


> Which one?


It was the very first Chris Hein solo violin. I notice it the most when comparing to other solo violin virtual instruments.


----------



## doctoremmet (Sep 29, 2020)

BradHoyt said:


> A note regarding the Chris Hein violin. To my ears, it sounds kinda like the violin is in a tunnel. It's entirely likely that it's just me...


Can’t say that it sounds that way to me Brad. In fact the Chris Hein Italian violin is one of my favourite solo strings instruments out there...


----------



## John Longley (Sep 29, 2020)

BradHoyt said:


> It was the very first Chris Hein solo violin. I notice it the most when comparing to other solo violin virtual instruments.


Fair enough, the EX Instruments sound a lot better to me, but it's always hard work with something that dry. I also think his studio has a low mid resonant build up from treating it heavily, but perhaps not bass trapping quite enough. I think the 1826 Violin is quite nice. 

Disabling the IRs and rolling your own helps a lot too, but the body IR is sometimes better if left on as he clearly designed the legato with that on.


----------



## BradHoyt (Sep 29, 2020)

doctoremmet said:


> Can’t say that it sounds that way to me Brad. In fact the Chris Hein Italian violin is one of my favourite solo strings instruments out there...


Yeah... I'm only thinking of the first solo violin he released. For financial reasons, I haven't listened to the Italian violin.


----------



## BradHoyt (Sep 29, 2020)

John Longley said:


> Fair enough, the EX Instruments sound a lot better to me, but it's always hard work with something that dry. I also think his studio has a low mid resonant build up from treating it heavily, but perhaps not bass trapping quite enough. I think the 1826 Violin is quite nice.
> 
> Disabling the IRs and rolling your own helps a lot too, but the body IR is sometimes better if left on as he clearly designed the legato with that on.


Thanks for the recommendations. I'll try what you suggest. The 1926 Violin sounds intriguing, but I've held off shopping for more solo violins since I'm trying to be content with Joshua Bell, SF's solo violins and Virharmonic's Bohemian violins.


----------



## doctoremmet (Sep 29, 2020)

BradHoyt said:


> Thanks for the recommendations. I'll try what you suggest. The 1926 Violin sounds intriguing, but I've held off shopping for more solo violins since I'm trying to be content with Joshua Bell, SF's solo violins and Virharmonic's Bohemian violins.


With that selection I’d gather you’re pretty much sorted - yes.


----------



## FinGael (Sep 29, 2020)

tl;dr

A VI-C member: My dad is stronger than your dad. Your dad sounds totally fake and he cannot even perform.
OP: All your dads are whining pus*ies and sound fake and whiny.
A VI-C member 3: You should hire a dad - when you need one. A hobbyist dad can never compete with a true professional.
A VI-C member 4: Any elderly gentleman is fine. Neighbours won't know the difference and the rest of the humankind don't care.
Me: Ok. Maybe enough coffee for today.


----------

