# Spitfire BBC Symphonic Orchestra vs VSL CUBE Full library Black Friday offer



## Jean Phi (Nov 24, 2019)

VSL cube full library is going to be 2000€ for BF sales.... 760000 samples, 1 MIC setting
BBCSO : 999€ : 1005296 SAMPLES , BUT ther is 11 mic settings , so is it 1005296 SAMPLES / 11 = 91390 DIFFERENT instruments samples --> so it is 8.3 less expression in samples than VSL, for 2 times cheaper with BF offer .... No run articulations in BBCSO.
Am I right ? Do you still consider BBCSO worth it in front of VSL Symphonic CUBE ? To me Guy Bacos demos at VSL still blow all spifire demos in term of realism and emotion ...


----------



## pinki (Nov 24, 2019)

Don't forget with that amount of financial investment: Spitfire=no demo, no returns, no resale (you buy it, don't like it, too bad)
VSL= demo (30 day money back guarantee), resale allowed. 
That is a BIG difference and more important than the number of samples in my opinion!


----------



## RogiervG (Nov 24, 2019)

pinki said:


> Don't forget with that amount of financial investment: Spitfire=no demo, no returns, no resale (you buy it, don't like it, too bad)
> VSL= demo (30 day money back guarantee), resale allowed.
> That is a BIG difference and more important than the number of samples in my opinion!



Potential Down side of VSL:
E-licenser and the quite expensive assurance you surely want from VSL.
Also another downside: you do need the pro player, sold seperately, if you want utmost realism and likely some mirx rooms too (also sold separately).
and maybe the plugin suite too (also sold separately), for post mixing/mastering work.

Also the sound is quite different. BBCSO sounds more modern classical, and VSL more older classical in tone (aka very clinical/sterile). Depending on the sound you are after, one will give you more direct gratification than the other will.. (it's up to you which one that will be)


----------



## jamwerks (Nov 24, 2019)

That VSL Cube is more than 10 years old. You'd need also MIR which is just a simulation. It's a no-brainer imo, BBC


----------



## pinki (Nov 24, 2019)

_Potential Down side of VSL:
E-licenser and the quite expensive assurance you surely want from VSL.
Also another downside: you do need the pro player, sold seperately, if you want utmost realism and likely some mirx rooms too (also sold separately).
and maybe the plugin suite too (also sold separately), for post mixing/mastering work.

Also the sound is quite different. BBCSO sounds more modern classical, and VSL more older classical in tone (aka very clinical/sterile). Depending on the sound you are after, one will give you more direct gratification than the other will.. (it's up to you which one that will be)_

No demo/resale/return Spitfire ....so buy VSL and return it if you don't like it?
Gotta say I agree about Cube being old- I would go for Synchron SE which sounds fantastic


----------



## RogiervG (Nov 24, 2019)

pinki said:


> No demo/resale/return Spitfire ....so buy VSL and return it if you don't like it?



You already mentioned this, no need to do this twice


----------



## pinki (Nov 24, 2019)

Thanks for pointing that out!


----------



## daviddln (Nov 24, 2019)

Go for VSL's Cube. BBC will probably be on sale several times in 2020 (Spring, BF, Xmas...)
And I agree, Guy Bacos's demos are more expressive than BBC's.


----------



## Scamper (Nov 24, 2019)

Jean Phi said:


> ...so it is 8.3 less expression in samples than VSL, for 2 times cheaper with BF offer .... No run articulations in BBCSO.



I'd be careful to compare libaries by sample count. Sure, it gives a rough idea about the amount of content, but I'd say, that it's not necessarily more expressive, if you got more samples. Same libaries can do more than others, which have more content and articulations. Also, modern programming and a musical approach when recording samples can give more expressiveness with relatively few samples.

If you look at EWQL SO for example, there are more than 50 articulations of longs and shorts for just the first violins, but many are quite similar and many longs don't have dynamic control with CC1 during a note, which is very usable anymore.

Sure, prerecorded swells and arcs as in VSL CUBE can be more natural, but also limiting in length, so if you got a library, that can do those with just a sustain sound and proper dynamic fading, it will be also less work.

I'd agree with the others and find it better to go by sound and other features.


----------



## BlessedFountain (Nov 24, 2019)

The cube has been working perfectly on any system (MAC or Windows) for almost a decade, maybe the BBCSO would be able to say the same in 10 years time...............

Although I wouldn’t hold my breath as a lot of the same problems have been synonymous with Spitfire libraries.......


----------



## Pixelpoet1985 (Nov 24, 2019)

Go for VSL, this is quality you pay for. It's many times better than BBCSO.


----------



## BlessedFountain (Nov 24, 2019)

^ This.
There are subjective views about libraries which there are no point arguing about as those things are down to personal preference.
There are objective facts:
VSL cube is vastly more deeply sampled, has vastly more articulations and instruments. Covers a broader range from solo to chamber to symphonic and most important of all is presently stable and guaranteed to run smoothly on any platform.

When Spitfire stabilises and optimised their software player and sorts out the genuine myriad of issues plaguing the BBCSO, then and only then can it be objectively be considered a recommendation.

I can understand one buying the BBCSO knowing all the issues plaguing it, I however find it incomprehensible that people feel free to recommend a product they can’t even guarantee would run without major issues to someone else as a major purchase


----------



## JT (Nov 24, 2019)

Guy's demos for VSL are stellar, as are Andy's for SF. But neither one of their talents come with the software. IMO, I've heard more impressive tracks from SF users rather than VSL users.


----------



## BlessedFountain (Nov 24, 2019)

.....but the software has to actually..... run......well.


----------



## paulthomson (Nov 24, 2019)

Hey Blessed Fountain. 

just for balance for the OP. There is no “myriad of problems” and the software does run well for 99% of the user base.

for the remaining small number of PC users we have rolled out two significant fixes that have solved a fair proportion of their issues, and have another tweak that we have been testing that will go out shortly that should also help the remaining issues.

with the vast number of different configurations of PCs in the wild it is sometimes hard to predict what might cause an issue until you see the issue and can fix it.

I hope you don’t mind me popping my 2p in!

All the best,
Paul


----------



## BlessedFountain (Nov 25, 2019)

paulthomson said:


> I hope you don’t mind me popping my 2p in!



Hi Paul,

Not at all. It is your right to defend your product as it is was mine to have made a point of view of it based on reported user experiences.

In all fairness, your post post makes references to issues (both those resolved and those about to be resolved), so I don’t think my comments were unreasonable or malicious.

Any how, the OP now has an open line to you on this thread(I hope) and that might be very useful to the OP


----------



## jamwerks (Nov 25, 2019)

Fwiw, I have most of what's in the Cube, but not yet BBC. For the same money as the VSL, you could get BBC plus the next 4-5 add-ons, and you'll end up with about the same arts, and a much more modern product and useable sound. I'd even suggest getting BBC + SCS (that has over 25 arts btw). That's probably the best string library ever produced imo. Which makes me think a Chamber strings done by BBC will be coming and will be awesome.

I still use VSL woodwinds, but I find all the rest of the orchestra has much better options, including for percussion Synchron Percussion. The perc included in the Cube is really not good imo, do only to the size and acoutics of where it was recorded.


----------



## Zero&One (Nov 25, 2019)

I have VSL and BBC. My thoughts over excluding sample count/price etc
Both sound great. God like with Andy or Guy.
No issues with either products, contrary to some beliefs.
VSL player is developed for NASA minded people, SA player for musicians. (Synchron player is good)

I rarely use VSL for inspiration though, there's way more faffing on and tweaking that get's in the way for me.
BBC sounds great out the box with zero effort. Exactly what I want from software today.


----------



## BlessedFountain (Nov 25, 2019)

It will be interesting to get the OP’s views as this thread is intended for the OP’s benefit


----------



## Olfirf (Nov 25, 2019)

Oh, between the two, definitely get VSL. This is a well proven software and concept. You will have to work on your room sound with the VSL though. When you have done so, however, the Cube will give you lots of options to make a more realistic and expressive sound.


----------



## Zero&One (Nov 25, 2019)

BlessedFountain said:


> It will be interesting to get the OP’s views as this thread is intended for the OP’s benefit



Also other forum users, as BF sales include both products many will be interested.


----------



## BlessedFountain (Nov 25, 2019)

James H said:


> Also other forum users, as BF sales include both products many will be interested.



Indeed.

However I feel the input of the OP would help to keep things focused.

I have seen threads like this that veer of into the realm of the personal ideals of we the responders and is then no longer suited to the specific needs of the OP.

Factual objective responses (rather than subjective) to the OP’s continual input would be helpful


----------



## BlessedFountain (Nov 25, 2019)

jamwerks said:


> For the same money as the VSL, you could get BBC plus the next 4-5 add-ons, and you'll end up with about the same arts, and a much more modern product and useable sound.



At the moment one can't say that with certainty, the comparison is between 2 currently available products in their currently available states.



jamwerks said:


> useable sound



Objectively speaking worldwide, notable musicians have gotten a usable sound out of it. Or is there another definition for usable?

I only ask as these are tropes I see on this forum regularly, in addition to "liveless", "sterile", which I don't get and would like to understand. Every sample is lifeless, so is every instrument until the musician fashions it into something. Again I truly don't get this and would like some elucidation in this regard.

I will also add I don't find any VI library realistic, as they are all Virtual as implied in the name and have not replaced real musicians in the places that matter.


----------



## jamwerks (Nov 25, 2019)

BlessedFountain said:


> Or is there another definition for usable?


As you probably know, the Cube is recorded in a small fairly reflective space, to which other early reflections and tails can be added to try to give the impression of a hall. Once the hall is added thought, all of those baked-in early reflections from the original recording space are still there and even amplified through the above process.

I would say to OP, listen closely to fill mixes created with VSL Cube, not how good the melody, harmony, or orchestration is, but just the raw sound of the samples. If you think that's as good as the sound of a full mix BBC orchestra or better, then buy VSL. Too me there's no contest.


----------



## robgb (Nov 25, 2019)

I lean toward VSL, only because I know the sample set is superb. BUT, the dongle. You'll need a dongle. If the extra cost and the dongle don't bother you, go for it.



jamwerks said:


> As you probably know, the Cube is recorded in a small fairly reflective space,



If the cube is the original samples (from over a decade ago) I'm pretty sure VSL recorded the samples in a completely dead space, which means the instruments are bone dry with no reflections at all. I have Opus 1 from those days and I can assure you there aren't any.


----------



## BlessedFountain (Nov 25, 2019)

No doubt the dongle is a big factor to be considered, some like it some don't. Both positions are perfectly reasonable.

The upside is that you can return any product you purchase from their site within 30 days, you can possibly resell the products at good value when you tire of them and you can use them on any computer, so that is a plus for me.

The VSL protection plan mitigates downsides to losing the dongle, although that again is also not everyone's cup of tea either.


----------



## Zero&One (Nov 25, 2019)

Also worth noting from OP's original post, the correct BF prices would be:
VSL 1990€ 
BBCSO 793€ plus your free Aperture (grumbles)

The difference of 1197€ isn't small change.


----------



## BlessedFountain (Nov 25, 2019)

jamwerks said:


> As you probably know, the Cube is recorded in a small fairly reflective space, to which other early reflections and tails can be added to try to give the impression of a hall. Once the hall is added thought, all of those baked-in early reflections from the original recording space are still there and even amplified through the above process.



I am aware of the silent stage. The design was to mitigate as much of it's ER as is possible.

As I said many musicians, including notable ones world have managed to used them, so how has the above point negated that to support your assertion that they are in you words unusable, when they have clearly been used and are usable?

Also you are aware of the issues inherent in "wet" samples, in developing a cohesive (that word!) mix from a mishmash of sections that were recorded independently (even if recorded in the same halls/studios) with so much room detail in them? 

If the little ER of the silent stage is such an issue, the mishmashing of wet samples with all their wet loveliness would be armageddon!


----------



## BlessedFountain (Nov 25, 2019)

James H said:


> Also worth noting from OP's original post, the correct BF prices would be:
> VSL 1990€
> BBCSO 793€ plus your free Aperture (grumbles)
> 
> The difference of 1197€ isn't small change.



The standard library is available for €999 that still has more articulations, sections, instruments etc than BBCSO. It is also a stable known quantity.


----------



## 5Lives (Nov 25, 2019)

BlessedFountain said:


> The standard library is available for €999 that still has more articulations, sections, instruments etc than BBCSO. It is also a stable known quantity



You keep saying this but do you actually own BBCSO or are you just repeating old complaints that have been addressed? The Spitfire player is stable for almost everybody now. You said we should be objective - so should you.


----------



## BlessedFountain (Nov 25, 2019)

5Lives said:


> You keep saying this but do you actually own BBCSO or are you just repeating old complaints that have been addressed? The Spitfire player is stable for almost everybody now. You said we should be objective - so should you.



Is your contention that the Spitfire Player is as robust, stable and as solid as VSL VI Pro? The comparison
here is between BBSCO and VSL Symphonic cube.

Are you saying the VSL cube is not stable for everyone? That there are complaints of users who bought it and are having problems running the software? Notice I am not talking of programming issues of the samples, I am talking about the performance of the software player.

I will implore you to be objective


----------



## jamwerks (Nov 25, 2019)

BlessedFountain said:


> ...so how has the above point negated that to support your assertion that they are in you words unusable, when they have clearly been used and are usable?...


...This isn't a matter of facts, it's forum where we express our opinions. If you want to bicker, buy a goldfish


----------



## BlessedFountain (Nov 25, 2019)

Also I don't need to own BBCSO to understand the issues that users posted, so many of them with actual detail that there are fundamental issues which is understandable because Spitfire has no long history of developing software players and they have to go through growing pains like everyone else did.


----------



## Zero&One (Nov 25, 2019)

BlessedFountain said:


> The standard library is available for €999 that still has more articulations, sections, instruments etc than BBCSO. It is also a stable known quantity.



But _he_ isn't after the standard library? OP asked about the full library... the OP did.
So there's a difference of 1197€. Unless you want to move the goalposts again.


----------



## 5Lives (Nov 25, 2019)

BlessedFountain said:


> Is your contention that the Spitfire Player is as robust, stable and as solid as VSL VI Pro? The comparison
> here is between BBSCO and VSL Symphonic cube.
> 
> Are you saying the VSL cube is not stable for everyone? That there are complaints of users who bought it and are having problems running the software? Notice I am not talking of programming issues of the samples, I am talking about the performance of the software player.
> ...



Given I have both players - yes, they are just as stable as one another (I’m running a Mac). There is a threshold for stability and Spitfire’s player has surpassed it now. You’re spreading false truths and misinformation (on purpose for some reason and with no first hand experience). And when it comes to usability, the Spitfire player is far easier to use and setup than VSL.


----------



## BlessedFountain (Nov 25, 2019)

jamwerks said:


> ...This isn't a matter of facts, it's forum where we express our opinions. If you want to bicker, buy a goldfish



I prefer pirañas  

Wow that hit DefCon something real quick, phew.............

I don't think I was uncivil to you, however if you feel my post was bickering, we can both avoid each others posts and end the discussion there.

---End Transmission---


----------



## BlessedFountain (Nov 25, 2019)

5Lives said:


> Given I have both players - yes, they are just as stable as one another (I’m running a Mac). There is a threshold for stability and Spitfire’s player has surpassed it now. You’re spreading false truths and misinformation (on purpose for some reason and with no first hand experience). And when it comes to usability, the Spitfire player is far easier to use and setup than VSL.




Indeed I made several accounts and manufactured several issues to post against BBCSO as part of some grand conspiracy and Spitfire support played along pushing out fixes and are working now and testing further fixes to be pushed out all to what end?

I guess now you have exposed me, Spitfire support can move on to the other things on their plate.

Intriguing comment from you though


----------



## BlessedFountain (Nov 25, 2019)

James H said:


> But _he_ isn't after the standard library? OP asked about the full library... the OP did.
> So there's a difference of 1197€. Unless you want to move the goalposts again.



The OP mentioned the price of the Standard Library even though he said full. My post said the standard library is €999. What goalpost did I shift.

The standard library has More articulations, sections, instruments than BBCSO and is a known stable quantity so I don't need any contortions.

Come to think of it, what goalpost did I shift before? I only ask because you brought it up


----------



## AndyP (Nov 25, 2019)

I find comparing these two libraries is not entirely objective. 

Both libraries are of high quality. Quantitatively VSL offers more choice and the higher price is justified in any case.
Which one of these libraries someone prefers depends on the taste, and perhaps the way it should be used.

BBCSO has another sound character that is very good and somehow new.

But I prefer the playability of the VSL libraries, their legato, and appreciate the neutral tone. The Synchron player, Vienna Instruments Pro player is accurate, easy to use and offers a lot of useful features. 

Unfortunately, I can't certify this for the spitfire player yet. The spitfire player doesn't have even the slightest amount of features.

Nevertheless, it is hard to know which of the two libraries is the right one for the OP.


----------



## babylonwaves (Nov 25, 2019)

BlessedFountain said:


> Is your contention that the Spitfire Player is as robust, stable and as solid as VSL VI Pro? The comparison
> here is between BBSCO and VSL Symphonic cube.



in my personal opinion: yes, both are stable (at least on my mac, can't say anything about other platforms). I use the SF player for HZ Strings for about a year and VEPRO for a long time with a Cube. both work fine, both have little things I'd wish to change but no deal-breakers.

let me say something about the two libraries. I know them both and they're totally different. The strength of BBCSO is the microphone positions and the way it allows you to shape the sound. You can mix with mics vs. mixing with EQs. The strength of the Cube is that there (practically) is no room and you can build your own atmosphere without many restrictions. I have to say, the Cube doesn't have as much character for me, BBCSO ouses character. Of course, that can be a blessing or a curse depending on how you get on with the imprinted character. I personally would make a buying decision on the _sound and concept_ and not on the _sample size, dynamic layers, details on the players or even articulations_.

HTH


----------



## BlessedFountain (Nov 25, 2019)

I have purposely throughout this thread not made a judgement of the BBCSO sound, sample quality, usability as those are subjective, I have stated indisputable facts:

The Cube (this applies to full or standard before I am accused of changing match venues) has more articulations, more sections, more instruments and covers every size of the regular Orchestra. It is a more stable known quantity.

There have been issues dealt with and issues being dealt with the BBCSO rollout. That is also a fact.

Yet some here for reasons unknown reason feel they need to ride in to slay the dragon.

Paul from Spitfire has defended his company here and any prospective client will pay attention to his statement and decide for themselves.


----------



## jamwerks (Nov 25, 2019)

"Indisputable facts"? That's just what this forum needs is another fact-checker....


----------



## Zero&One (Nov 25, 2019)

BlessedFountain said:


> The OP mentioned the price of the Standard Library even though he said full. My post said the standard library is €999. What goalpost did I shift.



OP post #1



Jean Phi said:


> VSL cube full library is going to be 2000€ for BF sales....



?

Of the previous 37 posts 14 of them are from yourself... We get it, you advise VSL at the extra 1197€ costs. There's no need to flood the thread to justify your own purchases though, as it serves the OP no use.
As you don't actually own BBCSO, the OP should take that into account. As it could be looked at a bias.
Your stability 'facts' are derived from a handful of users on a forum, most of whom have never replied since. So we should considered these fixed as that's the official stability source.


----------



## BlessedFountain (Nov 25, 2019)

babylonwaves said:


> in my personal opinion: yes, both are stable (at least on my mac, can't say anything about other platforms). I use the SF player for HZ Strings for about a year and VEPRO for a long time with a Cube. both work fine, both have little things I'd wish to change but no deal-breakers.
> 
> let me say something about the two libraries. I know them both and they're totally different. The strength of BBCSO is the microphone positions and the way it allows you to shape the sound. You can mix with mics vs. mixing with EQs. The strength of the Cube is that there (practically) is no room and you can build your own atmosphere without many restrictions. I have to say, the Cube doesn't have as much character for me, BBCSO ouses character. Of course, that can be a blessing or a curse depending on how you get on with the imprinted character. I personally would make a buying decision on the _sound and concept_ and not on the _sample size, dynamic layers, details on the players or even articulations_.
> 
> HTH



Thank you for the tone of your answer. As I posted above I tried to stay on objective facts as subjective doesn't work in this case. I disagree with some of your points, but for me some of my disagreements don't matter because that is just my view.

The issue here is that as Paul said fixes are being tested to be pushed, that is an acknowledgement that not everyone has a stable version. So what if the OP ends up in the so called minority of people that are affected, can anyone guarantee that?

I am sure VSL is not working on fixes to be pushed for it's players for the cube to be useful and stable. Whatever anyone thinks of VSL, software players are their strongest point. Does that mean VI Pro and Synchron Player are perfect, no, but they are more mature and more stable and known quantities. To say the Spitfire Player is at this stage as robust as VSL's players which are industry leaders is not credible.


----------



## BlessedFountain (Nov 25, 2019)

James H said:


> OP post #1
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I take your point on that he did mention the full library. See I am not an ogre and I value facts and will concede when presented, it's no skin off my back and I have no crusade to be right.

However.... your assertion that I am justifying my purchase is clearly conjecture on your part. I will however not make any assumptions of your intentions. That would be pointless.........

I didn't say I use BBCSO, I didn't make any personal complaint about BBCSO not working for me..........

Thank you for the thread count, but I haven't posted all 37 shouting at the OP to buy VSL, some have been lovely side conversations with people such as you.......

Personal attacks don't do much..........


----------



## Zero&One (Nov 25, 2019)

I really hope he buys VSL after all this 😁


----------



## BlessedFountain (Nov 25, 2019)

James H said:


> I really hope he buys VSL after all this 😁



Herb could visit this thread and personally seal the deal


----------



## BlessedFountain (Nov 25, 2019)

jamwerks said:


> "Indisputable facts"? That's just what this forum needs is another fact-checker....



Are we discussing or bickering? Are we ignoring each others posts or not? Honest question


----------



## BlessedFountain (Nov 25, 2019)

See above, I find personal attacks childish, so...................


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Nov 25, 2019)

BlessedFountain said:


> The issue here is that as Paul said fixes are being tested to be pushed, that is an acknowledgement that not everyone has a stable version. So what if the OP ends up in the so called minority of people that are affected, can anyone guarantee that?



Then the OP is probably on a PC that has a configuration that needs tweaking, not the SF Player itself. Cube has been around for a while, I remember tons of gripes over on the VSL forum years ago, every player has its growing pains; it may not even work on the OP's system. Yes, I own BBCSO, zero issues.


----------



## schrodinger1612 (Nov 25, 2019)

Sorry to hijack; but maybe answering my query can also give the OP added insight.

Would you say the VSL Cube is more neutral in terms of being able to handle many different styles - let's say I want to produce a more ambient, atmospheric sound for one project, and a more cinematic style (including bombastic trailers) for another. Perhaps there are no shortcuts and the only way forward would be to purchase multiple libs.

I was thinking of utilising the Scandi bundle (Tundra, Olof Arnaulds Chamber Evo etc.) for ambient projects; with VSL doubling up as a cinematic scoring tool along with the Albion Bundle. The advantage of the VSL would be that it can blend easily between the two bundles (as well as other rock, pop etc. based productions), due to being dry in nature.

I was thinking that maybe VSL would be overkill, but due to the discount, it may turn out to be a sound investment. Can anyone help me put things into perspective?


----------



## BlessedFountain (Nov 25, 2019)

Wolfie2112 said:


> I remember tons of gripes over on the VSL forum years ago, every player has its growing pains; it may not even work on the OP's system. Yes, I own BBCSO, zero issues.



That is a point I have made over and over again and your point makes my point.

All those years ago I am sure there were people on the VSL forums who said they had no issues. Developers don't push out fixes as a result of every complaint as that would be unsustainable, but to issues that are fundamental even if a so called minority have them. The issues raise were not niche cases, you were on the thread infact most of the people here were on that thread. You saw people on that thread post their configuration and system reports, those weren't niche cases.

I take your word that it works for you as I have no facts to dispute, however statements from Spitfire themselves show it didn't work for some and they have been pushing fixes and are about to push fixes and will continue to do so. It is the birthing pains of a new product, anyone working in software knows that it is almost impossible for a company to launch a mass product on a new player(their first) and knock it out of the park. VSL has gone through it and can now assuredly push products on that stable platform. Spitfire and OT have a lot of growing pain ahead of the in terms of running their players.

OR is Spitfire so hallowed that they can't be criticised or scrutinised? People have felt free on this thread(not you) to attack VSLs productive subjectively but can't countenance any criticisms of BBCSO.
Imagine if I had said the BBSCO doesn't really sound like the actual BBCSO performing live and that the OP shouldn't buy it as a result....... Just wow.

I haven't attacked you for mentioning problems VSL had years ago or even asked for proof, because logic dictates they would have had growing points at some point. See VSL is not so hallowed to be beyond scrutiny or criticism or negative opinions.


----------



## BlessedFountain (Nov 25, 2019)

schrodinger1612 said:


> Sorry to hijack; but maybe answering my query can also give the OP added insight.
> 
> Would you say the VSL Cube is more neutral in terms of being able to handle many different styles - let's say I want to produce a more ambient, atmospheric sound for one project, and a more cinematic style (including bombastic trailers) for another. Perhaps there are no shortcuts and the only way forward would be to purchase multiple libs.
> 
> I was thinking the Scandi bundle (Tundra, Olof Arnaulds Chamber Evo etc.) for ambient projects; with VSL also for ambient but doubling up as a cinematic scoring tool along with the Albion Bundle. The advantage of the VSL would be that it can blend easily between the two bundles, due to being dry in nature.



I would say you should go to their (VSL) website. Go to the music page and listen to the various compositions there. 

They are grouped by styles, compositions and composers amongst others. That is your best bet as that is what you will give you the most realistic picture of what you will get.


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Nov 25, 2019)

robgb said:


> If the cube is the original samples (from over a decade ago) I'm pretty sure VSL recorded the samples in a completely dead space, which means the instruments are bone dry with no reflections at all. I have Opus 1 from those days and I can assure you there aren't any.



That's kind of a persistent misconception that's been floating around forever. The Silent Stage is NOT an anechoic chamber or something like that, and there actually are early reflections in the recordings. It's "just" super-dry, but certainly not without early reflections.


----------



## BlessedFountain (Nov 25, 2019)

Jimmy Hellfire said:


> That's kind of a persistent misconception that's been floating around forever. The Silent Stage is NOT an anechoic chamber or something like that, and there actually are early reflections in the recordings. It's "just" super-dry, but certainly not without early reflections.



The silent stage also helped to avoid issues like unwanted captures like floor noise, external sounds and a lot of other issues that turn up in competitors sample recordings.


----------



## CT (Nov 25, 2019)

I suggest the one that wasn't recorded in a closet.


----------



## BlessedFountain (Nov 25, 2019)

miket said:


> I suggest the one that wasn't recorded in a closet.



I think you should state that you mean VSL Cube, some may think you mean BBCSO and would charge in to destroy you at all cost 🤣


----------



## CT (Nov 25, 2019)

What?


----------



## robgb (Nov 25, 2019)

Jimmy Hellfire said:


> That's kind of a persistent misconception that's been floating around forever. The Silent Stage is NOT an anechoic chamber or something like that, and there actually are early reflections in the recordings. It's "just" super-dry, but certainly not without early reflections.


Good to know. I was always under the impression that VSL used an anechoic chamber to record their original samples. Thanks for the correction.


----------



## BlessedFountain (Nov 25, 2019)

miket said:


> What?



Very long story.....it pertains to early postings on this thread.

However my post was made in jest, please feel free to ignore it.


----------



## BlessedFountain (Nov 25, 2019)

The silent stage is intriguing. I looked into when I switched to VSL as I couldn't reconcile what I heard in the demos and the prevailing myths and tropes about their samples. 

It explains the strengths and weaknesses of their "dry" samples and their over arching philosophy that dictates their approach. I always find it useful to investigate a company's philosophy, track record as it indicates where they have been, were they are going and what issues I am likely to encounter.






SILENT STAGE - Vienna Symphonic Library


Vienna Symphonic Library's recording facility, the specially built Silent Stage




www.vsl.co.at




Silent Stage


----------



## schrodinger1612 (Nov 25, 2019)

BlessedFountain said:


> I would say you should go to their (VSL) website. Go to the music page and listen to the various compositions there.
> 
> They are grouped by styles, compositions and composers amongst others. That is your best bet as that is what you will give you the most realistic picture of what you will get.


Yes I will check those out - it’s helpful that they have all the demos categorised. It would still be useful to have a general consensus here though


----------



## BlessedFountain (Nov 25, 2019)

schrodinger1612 said:


> Yes I will check those out - it’s helpful that they have all the demos categorised. It would still be useful to have a general consensus here though



I tend to avoid consensus because people have inherent biases and there can be over representation of certain sides on VI. So it not really a conducive environment. VSL demos are always panned for not being polished, but they deliberately show you the raw state of the Library and lists whichever of their software suite that was used. That way one doesn't experience the frustration of buying a product based on an awesome demo that turns out to be out of the reach of mere mortals.

The demos and walkthroughs will show you wether you can work with it or not. The demos that I loved on the site also have the midi files and VI Pro/VE Pro presets so one can download and see how exactly the sausage was made.

Also one can always toss the product back to VSL before 30days is over if one is not happy with the purchase (if bought from their site)


----------



## pinki (Nov 25, 2019)

Wow! This thread is insanity now.

Buy them both, don't buy anything. Take up crocheting...Make EDM instead...
(the OP will have certainly fled for the hills by now . Who can blame them.)


----------



## BlessedFountain (Nov 25, 2019)

pinki said:


> Wow! This thread is insanity now.
> 
> But them both, don't buy anything. Take up crocheting...Make EDM instead...
> (the OP will have certainly fled for the hills by now . Who can blame them.)


🤣


----------



## BlessedFountain (Nov 25, 2019)

Jokes aside, most VSL related thread gets derailed by serious venom against their products. EWHO is another bashing favourite and NI Symphony Series also. Yet the people who throw unbelievable mud against these products without a shred of evidence can never countenance anyone pointing out obvious non subjective flaws in whatever library currently their darling at the moment. 

Either all libraries discussed are open to criticism or non are


----------



## CT (Nov 25, 2019)

BlessedFountain said:


> Jokes aside, most VSL related thread gets derailed by serious venom against their products. EWHO is another bashing favourite and NI Symphony Series also. Yet the people who throw unbelievable mud against these products without a shred of evidence can never countenance anyone pointing out obvious non subjective flaws in whatever library currently their darling at the moment.
> 
> Either all libraries discussed are open to criticism or non are



Every developer has naysayers here in some measure. Every developer's products have flaws so that makes sense.

I personally couldn't be more unsatisfied with VSL, from personal experience, so if the choice is between it and something else I will probably endorse something else.


----------



## BlackDorito (Nov 25, 2019)

I started out with the VSL Special Edition and had major fun with it for one year. Going from nothing to VSL SE ('zero to hero'?) was amazing. But when I started getting the Spitfire libraries I discovered:
- they were warmer and had a room character (Air) that I liked
- less fiddling with room (MIR is complicated ... much easier to dial in C-T-A mics)
- I could do most projects with just the master PC, instead of master-slave needed for sizable VSL templates .. much faster startup
- Spitfire always seemed to come up with amazing deals

On this last point, it's my impression that most of the time, it is relatively expensive to upgrade from VSL SE to the 'VI' libraries. If the OP is able to plunk down major $$ right now during BF for the whole Cube, then perhaps this is not a problem.

Anyway, this is one person's journey. Started with VSL, now using Spitfire, CSS, and OT, as well as a smattering of individual instruments from other vendors.


----------



## BlessedFountain (Nov 25, 2019)

miket said:


> Every developer has naysayers here in some measure. Every developer's products have flaws so that makes sense.
> 
> I personally couldn't be more unsatisfied with VSL, from personal experience, so if the choice is between it and something else I will probably endorse something else.



My contention is that you would hardly be confronted for saying what you just did because it is VSL. Say that about one of the hallowed developers and it is world war 10. However I am no shrinking violet and will always say my piece.

However I find your statement measured because that is clearly your opinion and does not peddle unfounded tropes about the product


----------



## CT (Nov 25, 2019)

You might want to consider that some "tropes" are not in fact unfounded, and that some others may be, which is precisely why people will be confrontational about them.


----------



## BlessedFountain (Nov 25, 2019)

Anyway until the OP responds I see no more value in posting here, I did say earlier on these threads get derailed without OP interaction to keep the discussion focused. 

So I'm out


----------



## BlessedFountain (Nov 25, 2019)

miket said:


> You might want to consider that some "tropes" are not in fact unfounded, and that some others may be, which is precisely why people will be confrontational about them.



Without facts how does one discern those which are founded and those which are not?
I see no value in people being confrontational over issues that can't be resolved by a measurable agreed set of facts. It just results in endless bickering. I like things than can be resolved and don't bother with those that can't. I am happy to agree to disagree to resolve something that otherwise can't be resolved.

So I am out again, just wanted to end on a better note than previous posts. So thank you for a calm conversation


----------



## Frank1985 (Nov 26, 2019)

BlackDorito said:


> I started out with the VSL Special Edition and had major fun with it for one year. Going from nothing to VSL SE ('zero to hero'?) was amazing. But when I started getting the Spitfire libraries I discovered:
> - they were warmer and had a room character (Air) that I liked
> - less fiddling with room (MIR is complicated ... much easier to dial in C-T-A mics)
> - I could do most projects with just the master PC, instead of master-slave needed for sizable VSL templates .. much faster startup
> ...



Which libraries did you upgrade to after you were done with Vienna se?


----------



## Oliver (Nov 26, 2019)

i read the thread from the start and just realized that OP = Original poster
oh my.....oh my...
i wondered and studied ...


----------



## BlackDorito (Nov 26, 2019)

Frank1985 said:


> Which libraries did you upgrade to after you were done with Vienna se?


The ones I use the most from the 'full-orchestra' vendors are:
- Spitfire SSO (winds, brass, strings)
- Spitfire SCS (chamber strings)
- Spitfire Percussion (highly recommended)
- Cinematic Studios - CSS and CSB
- Orch Tools (OT) Ark 1+2 - mainly using choirs, percussion, harp

As a specific example, the template for my current project (a longer concert piece) is:
- Spitfire SSW
- CSB
- Spitfire Perc
- Elysium Harp, NI Harp
- Orange Tree Modern Nylon Gtr
- OT Roon piano
- Spitfire SCS
- Fluffy simple cello
- CSSS
- CSS
- Spitfire SSS

As you can see, I have quite a battery of strings .. gives lots of flexibility. But I suppose we are getting far afield from the original post. If I was to add anything from VSL to this template, it would be their woodwinds; I don't think the brass and strings would help much. From what I've heard, had I not already picked up the entire Spitfire SSO on various sales (patience required), I would've jumped at BBCSO.


----------



## AndyP (Nov 26, 2019)

I didn't notice it at first, but I start more and more often with VSL to start, and later to mix or layer with other libraries.
The playability especially with the new Synchron player suits me very well.
The somewhat neutral or "sterile" sound also has its advantages. I can concentrate on the composition and optimize the sound later.


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Nov 26, 2019)

AndyP said:


> I didn't notice it at first, but I start more and more often with VSL to start, and later to mix or layer with other libraries.
> The playability especially with the new Synchron player suits me very well.
> The somewhat neutral or "sterile" sound also has its advantages. I can concentrate on the composition and optimize the sound later.



I do that a lot. I find that I have to write to the samples the least with VSL. The editing and programming is superb and their libraries allow me to sequence stuff that would be very tough or tedious to pull off with some other libraries. So the VSL stuff often acts as the backbone and I can embellish the sound with other libraries later.

Also there's something about the very honest, pristine aesthetic of their recordings that helps me focus and try to orchestrate in some sensitive way. A lot of libraries can be deceiving. I sometimes play some awesome brass patches and go, well that's how they sound_ in the movies_, but ... if you know what I mean. I'll go and do that with Dimension Brass first and then we'll see where we're at.


----------



## mralmostpopular (Nov 26, 2019)

Honestly, for 2000€, you could get BBCSO, plus a handful of other libraries. That would give you a ton of versatility. No single library will realistically do it all well.

Personally, I’ve never been a huge VSL fan, but I appreciate that a lot of others are.


----------



## Nemoy (Nov 26, 2019)

Interesting and great discussion going on here. I listened to some of the demos for VSL. It has a much more classical sound to it. You would need to add your own reverb since the libraries are dry for the most part. My question is can you get the VSL libraries in just the Cube bundle to sound more cinematic and lush rather than the classical vibes I'm hearing from the demos? Also, saw that appassionata strings is not part of the bundle (this one is more for cinematic).


----------



## MDMullins (Nov 27, 2019)

Oliver said:


> i read the thread from the start and just realized that OP = Original poster
> oh my.....oh my...
> i wondered and studied ...



So O.P. and not Opie?







But seriously, I've been researching for about a week now and the _BBCSO_ has to be the best sounding library I've ever heard. Such realism must come with cutting edge work. I'm using _EW_ right now and it's possible to get a beautiful sound, but it takes a lot of work and I'm not sure the result is ever truly polished. _ThinkSpace Education_ on Youtube does a review.

VSL seems great, but I haven't found the library to beat this new one.



This + _Aperture_ will be my BF purchases.


----------



## ptram (Nov 27, 2019)

As for the articulations included in both libraries, I would compare BBCSO more to the Standard version of the Cube. But then, there are some very important articulations (for me), like sul tasto, that are only in the Full version. They don't match exactly.

The different conception of the two libraries should also be evaluated in view of what one will want to do with them. Only big epic orchestra? BBCSO is clearly made for that, and probably excels on that. With the Cube you will also need the MIR PRO reverb or more work with other reverbs you own.

Smaller ensembles, chamber or solo music, a more classical sound? It seems to me that in this case one would go better with the Cube, apparently more flexible than BBCSO.

Paolo


----------



## markleake (Nov 27, 2019)

BlessedFountain said:


> I am sure VSL is not working on fixes to be pushed for it's players for the cube to be useful and stable. Whatever anyone thinks of VSL, software players are their strongest point. Does that mean VI Pro and Synchron Player are perfect, no, but they are more mature and more stable and known quantities.


Speaking of facts... I know for a fact that the above is demonstrably not true. VSL have had ongoing problems with their Synchron Player for a long time now, for quite a number of Cubase users, which they've struggled to fix. I'm not sure about other DAWs, but from what people have told me and I've read elsewhere, many people still need to run Synchron Player in VSL Ensemble to get it to work, rather than direct in DAW. These issues are resolved for some, not for others. I know, because I'm one of them with the issue still. 

That issue is much worse than most of the BBCSO player issues, because the Synchron Player is totally unusable in those cases without other software to get it to work.


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Nov 27, 2019)

Nemoy said:


> My question is can you get the VSL libraries in just the Cube bundle to sound more cinematic and lush rather than the classical vibes I'm hearing from the demos?



To a degree certainly, but IMO you'll never quite get that type of sound that instantly comes out of the speakers when you load Albion ONE and hit any key, or something in that vein.

VSL libraries are often done an injustice around these parts IMO, by being compared to the usual epic and cinematic stuff out there, with the conclusion that it doesn't sound like the other stuff so it must be not so good or "lifeless" or whatever. It's an odd expectation, since not all film or media music sounds "Hollywood epic" either.

It is what it is, and it's very good at what it sets out to do. I appreciate these libraries exactly for their distinct philosophy and voice, and because they add something to my palette that's different from the other stuff I use.


----------



## AndyP (Nov 27, 2019)

Maybe it's because for many the unnatural, heavily processed sound is now normal. But if you listen carefully, you will notice that VSL comes much closer to the natural sound than most of its competitors!


----------



## BlessedFountain (Nov 27, 2019)

markleake said:


> Speaking of facts... I know for a fact that the above is demonstrably not true. VSL have had ongoing problems with their Synchron Player for a long time now, for quite a number of Cubase users, which they've struggled to fix. I'm not sure about other DAWs, but from what people have told me and I've read elsewhere, many people still need to run Synchron Player in VSL Ensemble to get it to work, rather than direct in DAW. These issues are resolved for some, not for others. I know, because I'm one of them with the issue still.
> 
> That issue is much worse than most of the BBCSO player issues, because the Synchron Player is totally unusable in those cases without other software to get it to work.



For starters the cube runs on VI or VI Pro not Synchron player..............

Just saying......

I only posted because you addressed me specifically to demonstrate some error in my statement.

Reread my statement you responded to, which you yourself added in your quote to indicate what you were responding to before you post again... If you must🙂

For the rest of your post....maybe Herb from VSL can step in to put you straight 😉


----------



## markleake (Nov 27, 2019)

BlessedFountain said:


> Reread my statement you responded to, which you yourself added in your quote to indicate what you were responding to before you post again... If you must🙂


Ok, yes, I re-read it. Not sure what your point is though?

I'm just saying it is demonstrably not true that the Synchron Player is stable yet. Didn't you say the opposite, and that you were focused on facts? That's why I was responded to this, to say in my experience (and others') that this just isn't what we've experienced.

I'm not sure why you keep singling me out on these threads when I disagree with you? It's OK for people to have differing opinions and experiences, and to not be shouted down for having them.


----------



## Ben (Nov 27, 2019)

Hi, here is not-Herb from VSL 

We believe that each user should be allowed to talk about his opinion and personal experiences.
Our libraries are great and they will work for a lot of different use-cases. There might be situations where libraries from other manufacturers will sound better. But this is the good part: You can choose which library is best for your case and nobody is stopping you from using one or the other, or even both together at the same time 

This conversation was really interesting to read, and we like to hear what other users say about our products, so we can further improve them and give you the best experience and libraries.
It would be nice if we could back to talking about your experience and opinions and let other users have their opinions. 
There is really no need to start fighting over sample libraries...

Best, Ben


----------



## markleake (Nov 27, 2019)

Thanks Ben! One thing I will add about my VSL experience so far... the VSL support team have been very responsive to trying to help with my specific issue. 

I very much like the library I bought, it sounds beautiful. I still have my fingers crossed on getting my issue fixed.


----------



## BlessedFountain (Nov 27, 2019)

markleake said:


> Ok, yes, I re-read it. Not sure what your point is though?
> 
> I'm just saying it is demonstrably not true that the Synchron Player is stable yet. Didn't you say the opposite, and that you were focused on facts? That's why I was responded to this, to say in my experience (and others') that this just isn't what we've experienced.
> 
> I'm not sure why you keep singling me out on these threads when I disagree with you? It's OK for people to have differing opinions and experiences, and to not be shouted down for having them.



Ok. This will be my last post to you on this thread. Not because I find you objectionable, but because I don't want to enter into a pointless argument .

You posted this on this thread:


> Speaking of facts... I know for a fact that the above is demonstrably not true.


.

You made it clear it was referencing my post, because you added my quotes in the post.

So I clearly didn't single you out, did I? 😁

I only asked you to reread my post which you posted which said this:


> I am sure VSL is not working on fixes to be pushed for it's players for the cube to be useful and stable. Whatever anyone thinks of VSL, software players are their strongest point. Does that mean VI Pro and Synchron Player are perfect, no, but they are more mature and more stable and known quantities. To say the Spitfire Player is at this stage as robust as VSL's players which are industry leaders is not credible.



The cube doesn't run on Synchron Player, that can be verified here:https://www.vsl.co.at/en/Product_Overview/VI_Series
See that it is listed under VI Series, not Synchron.

If your umbrage is that I said this:


> Does that mean VI Pro and Synchron Player are perfect, no, but they are more mature and more stable and known quantities. To say the Spitfire Player is at this stage as robust as VSL's players which are industry leaders is not credible.



I specifically made clear, I was uninterested in addressing that, and even joked that Herb Tucmandl the CEO of VSL could visit this thread and challenge your assertions like Paul Thompson felt he had to do mine. Hence the . So if I am not bothered to challenge your claims, how could I be trying to censure you?

I though we had a civilised conversation on this thread......https://vi-control.net/community/threads/starting-with-ni-symphony-series.87352/page-2#post-4467756
However it seems I was mistaken. Interestingly I was advising the OP on that thread to stick with his NI Symphony Series as a beginner and not bother about VSL yet. Wow one can't win, it seems.

So this is my last word to you, because as I posted earlier, I see no point in pointless confrontation.
I have said all I want to say, I am happy with what I have said.

The ball is in your court, do as you please, but I won't be playing


----------



## Ben (Nov 27, 2019)

I think @Paul Thompson also agrees with me on that:
- We want to let all users have their opinion and share them with others without beeing attacked
- There is no need for fighting over sample libraries


----------



## BlessedFountain (Nov 27, 2019)

I didn't attack the other person. I am completely at a loss as to how any can construe a post in which I specifically made clear I do not want confrontation and would not reply further can be construed as an attack?

The other person specifically called a statement I made false, they addressed me, so how did I attack them?


----------



## BlessedFountain (Nov 27, 2019)

This is my last word on this thread as a whole. I see no value in posting any further as I have nothing to add and don't want to keep making the same points to people who feel they need to address me personally. My views are clear in previous posts.

If anyone feels the need to address me, do not take it as a personal attack that I do not reply to you  .

Also my silence won't be some sort of clever ploy to stifle people's opinions either. O dear........

-----End transmission for good this time, really I promise  --------------


----------



## AndyP (Nov 27, 2019)

Ben said:


> - We want to let all users have their opinion and share them with others without beeing attacked
> - There is no need for fighting over sample libraries


This!


----------



## Dear Villain (Nov 27, 2019)

Wow, now talk about walking in to the Lion's Den! Last week, I posted an orchestral piece of mine done in my first year with VSL's Symphonic Cube (standard edition only) on the member's thread, suggesting that I wished I could re-do it. Over the past five years of using vi's, I have only used VSL's Cube for orchestral/chamber music, and someone suggested I consider the Spitfire BBC library. I came over to this area to find thousands of posts on it...no way am I ever going to get through that minefield! Then, I saw this thread, which has also taken on a life of it's own. 

Can I ask a few questions, specific to my situation, to determine if adding Spitfire's BBC library would be beneficial? I'd especially like to ask those that have used both products:

1) I write exclusively classical/concert music...mostly tonal. I spend as long as necessary on my midi mockups. With VSL, it's the only workflow I've known, and while I usually am quite happy with the results, I can't help but wonder if there's a more efficient way of working. I export midi from Finale in to Cubase to begin "tweaking." Is Spitfire closer to the intuitive qualities of the Joshua Bell violin, or does every last note need to be "loved" to result in a convincing performance?

2) I love VSL's consistency between samples. Does Spitfire offer the same? Will I be surprised by "bad" individual samples (ie. a weird buzzing noise, or some other artifact that will prevent me from using that note?)

3) I also love that I've been able to create a template with matching articulations across all instruments/sections of the orchestra using keyswitches. Does Spitfire work the same way? 

4) Can Spitfire handle rapid passagework convincingly? (crisp staccatos, legatos that are "nimble"?)

5) This last one may be a ridiculous question to ask, especially because nobody will be familiar with my work, but I'll ask it anyway (how shall I word this?) Assume I put an insane amount of work in to my mock-ups with VSL, and at the end of the day, am mostly satisfied with the result, but often hear from others that the VSL sound just doesn't do anything for them. If I put that same effort in to a mockup with the Spitfire BBC, all other things being equal (composition quality, etc.) do you suspect more people would find the end results with the BBC version to be more pleasing?

Sorry for the novel, but I'd be grateful for some responses. On a final note, I should mention that I don't particularly want to spend more money on new libraries and I don't suffer from this desire, ever. I've used the Cube exclusively for 5 years with absolutely no need to chase the latest and greatest. I might be at that point now, though 

Cheers!
Dave


----------



## AndyP (Nov 27, 2019)

Dear Villain said:


> ... do you suspect more people would find the end results with the BBC version to be more pleasing?


If you are satisfied as it is, then you belong to the happy ones who have achieved what others will strive for all their lives (and pay a lot of money for it).


----------



## richhickey (Nov 27, 2019)

Dear Villain said:


> Wow, now talk about walking in to the Lion's Den! Last week, I posted an orchestral piece of mine done in my first year with VSL's Symphonic Cube (standard edition only) on the member's thread, suggesting that I wished I could re-do it. Over the past five years of using vi's, I have only used VSL's Cube for orchestral/chamber music, and someone suggested I consider the Spitfire BBC library. I came over to this area to find thousands of posts on it...no way am I ever going to get through that minefield! Then, I saw this thread, which has also taken on a life of it's own.
> 
> Can I ask a few questions, specific to my situation, to determine if adding Spitfire's BBC library would be beneficial? I'd especially like to ask those that have used both products:



I could respond at length to each point, but it would likely result in a flame war  So I'll just say that given the things you value above, it is highly unlikely that you will find more success with Spitfire than VSL. If you haven't invested in the full cube and MIR suite that might be money better spent. I've listened to a bunch of your compositions and they seem to be mostly chamber sized, again arguing for VSL. That said, if you were going to target full orchestra at some point, the only place I would point you would be OT Berlin series, to capture more of your objectives above than Spitfire (but still fewer than VSL), with a lusher sound than VSL. (I own the full suites from all three companies, but stopped acquiring SF mid Studio series) But from what I've heard, VSL are still the best tools for what you do.


----------



## CT (Nov 27, 2019)

Dear Villain said:


> 4) Can Spitfire handle rapid passagework convincingly? (crisp staccatos, legatos that are "nimble"?)



This is the only question you ask that I can't unreservedly recommend BBCSO in response to. You can surely achieve these things with it. Whether or not it will be easier for you than with VSL, I can't say for certain. Given the performance legato patches, it's certainly easier to do varied passages than with many other libraries. 

I would very closely look into BBCSO if I were you.


----------



## BlackDorito (Nov 27, 2019)

Dear Villain said:


> Can I ask a few questions, specific to my situation, to determine if adding Spitfire's BBC library would be beneficial? I'd especially like to ask those that have used both products:


Dave,

Since and I have used both VSL and Spitfire a lot (although not BBCSO), let me comment on a few of your questions.

1) The very first admonition I got from a VI composer (while I was still using Notion) was “to get beautiful authentic sounding orchestral music from a VI library, you will be tweaking MIDI.” Your workflow is similar to mine except I tweak notes in Sibelius and export audio to Cubase/Reaper for final mixing. I don’t know about Finale, but Sibelius has ‘soundsets’ that map standard score markings to VSL articulations if you use instrument matrices that have been set up for that purpose (free from VSL). It works quite well. When I switched over to Spitfire, it was quite daunting at first, particularly with brass and woodwind passages where I was switching articulations note by note in a passage (e.g. between sustain/staccato or marcato/sustain). In Spitfire, you can set up your instruments to switch articulations via ‘UACC’ and then (in Sibelius) add a Definition – say ‘stacc’ – to make the switch in the score. I don’t know whether Finale has these sorts of features. [Sibelius can send keyswitches and controller changes with funky text commands in the score, such as ‘~N15,64’ or ‘~C11,100’] However, after awhile you get used to it and I don’t even think about it anymore. In my case I enter notes with the mouse; if you actually play notes in in real-time, you might find that by controlling note length and velocity, you need to switch artics less.

2) In my experience, generally Spitfire SSO is consistent. I therefore suspect BBCSO is also, but I haven’t used it. I have found weird notes here and there (IIRC, in Spitfire Solo Strings (old), SCS, and woodwinds), but my overall experience with Spitfire is that you set up your template, select the microphones, and everything blends well. I spent more time fiddling with MIR.

3) Use UACC

4) I haven’t methodically tested this, but the Spitfire SSO/SCS staccato/spiccatos work well for fast passages. Caveat: I’ve had difficulties getting realistic multitonguing on the trumpets, whereas CSB does it well, and again I haven’t tried BBCSO. When you mention nimble passagework, if you are thinking chamber-sized, BBCSO may be too ‘big’. The topic of Legato is a big can of worms that has been covered many times. I’ve seen opinions run all over the map on VI-C.

5) I will give a pure-opinion answer to your ridiculous question: Yes, with the caveat below. However, ‘lushing up’ your pieces using BBCSO may be best for newly-conceived music, not by reworking the existing pieces – I could see you getting disappointed with that. Ultimately, you would plunk down the $$ for BBCSO as another tool that would allow you to create with new sounds – sounds that are welcome and familiar to the VI-C crowd. You said ‘all things being equal’ but you might find that the new libraries help shape the result. I certainly do, and I like the Spitfire sound. If any new library doesn't inspire you one iota, and your use of BBCSO doesn't move the needle one smidge, I suspect you will have the same fans you have now (incl. myself).

BTW, I have tried to rework a VSL piece into Spitfire and also into OT. It is a slow process – you have to throw out all your old tweaks and re-tweak. In my case, after I started to perceive how the piece would newly sound, I decided it wasn’t worth my time. Cheers -Chris


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Nov 27, 2019)

Dear Villain said:


> f I put that same effort in to a mockup with the Spitfire BBC, all other things being equal (composition quality, etc.) do you suspect more people would find the end results with the BBC version to be more pleasing?



That is all subject to the listener. With the proper programming, pretty much any top-notch library will sounds pleasing.


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Nov 27, 2019)

I also don't own BBCSO, but a ton of other SF stuff, including the symphonic libraries, as well as VSL. From what I've seen in walkthroughs etc., BBC is very much in line with what you can expect from them. So, FWIW, some experieces:



Dear Villain said:


> 1) I write exclusively classical/concert music...mostly tonal. I spend as long as necessary on my midi mockups. With VSL, it's the only workflow I've known, and while I usually am quite happy with the results, I can't help but wonder if there's a more efficient way of working. I export midi from Finale in to Cubase to begin "tweaking." Is Spitfire closer to the intuitive qualities of the Joshua Bell violin, or does every last note need to be "loved" to result in a convincing performance?



Yes and no. When Spitfire patches work, they usually work without too much endless massaging. Of course there's still some work involved - your basic dynamics, velocity etc. But you can get a good result within reasonable time. The recordings generally already have a sense of performance already baked in and can therefor sound quite musical very quickly. However, there's a flipside to this: if the patch doesn't do what you're looking for on its own, you might have a very tedious time wrestling it to submission, and can end up spending awful lot of time never really quite getting where you wanted. So I would say: when it works, it works great. When it doesn't, it can be a difficult experience.

Generally, I think that making music on the computer with samples just takes time. Especially when it's more thought out, complex and dynamic music. People talk about "out of the box" and working quickly and fast results all the time ... I think this is all hogwash. Things take time. Unless you're content with assembly line music - which many are- you're gonna sit there and massage these stupid MIDI notes until you're blue in the face. This is a reality of working with samples IMO. I hate it, it often makes me miserable, but I don't believe a single person who claims that they can whip up great mockups and MIDI performances of great music quickly.



> 2) I love VSL's consistency between samples. Does Spitfire offer the same? Will I be surprised by "bad" individual samples (ie. a weird buzzing noise, or some other artifact that will prevent me from using that note?)



Expect to run into tuning issues, noisy samples and bum notes, notes of different lengths, etc. Not all the time, and it doesn't always have to be a problem, but it's there. I would actually say that part of the SF experience is accepting these things as an element of irregularity. When I use SF, I'm not doing it because I'm looking for reliability or a clean performance. I reach for these libraries when I want to add more vibe, imperfection and mood. But if that's not what you're looking for, it might be a recurrent problem.



> 4) Can Spitfire handle rapid passagework convincingly? (crisp staccatos, legatos that are "nimble"?)



Hell no. Might be totally different with BBCSO (which would suprise me), but this kind of stuff is generally a PITA with SF, it's just not their strong suit.

Quite honestly, for your type of work, to me VSL makes a whole lot of sense. If you're looking for a sound that's a bit more grand, lush and exciting, I feel that Orchestral Tools would be something to look into.


----------



## staypuft (Nov 27, 2019)

BlessedFountain said:


> This is my last word on this thread as a whole. I see no value in posting any further as I have nothing to add and don't want to keep making the same points to people who feel they need to address me personally. My views are clear in previous posts.
> 
> If anyone feels the need to address me, do not take it as a personal attack that I do not reply to you  .
> 
> ...



No........you are clearly an experienced VSL user and your input is welcomed as much as any other user.


----------



## MDMullins (Nov 27, 2019)

miket said:


> This is the only question you ask that I can't unreservedly recommend BBCSO in response to. You can surely achieve these things with it. Whether or not it will be easier for you than with VSL, I can't say for certain. Given the performance legato patches, it's certainly easier to do varied passages than with many other libraries.
> 
> I would very closely look into BBCSO if I were you.




So this might be off-topic (a separate thread?) but could expand on how you achieve agile legato? What techniques are most effective with Spitfire products — specifically with BBC if you have that experience?


----------



## Dear Villain (Nov 27, 2019)

richhickey said:


> I could respond at length to each point, but it would likely result in a flame war  So I'll just say that given the things you value above, it is highly unlikely that you will find more success with Spitfire than VSL. If you haven't invested in the full cube and MIR suite that might be money better spent. I've listened to a bunch of your compositions and they seem to be mostly chamber sized, again arguing for VSL. That said, if you were going to target full orchestra at some point, the only place I would point you would be OT Berlin series, to capture more of your objectives above than Spitfire (but still fewer than VSL), with a lusher sound than VSL. (I own the full suites from all three companies, but stopped acquiring SF mid Studio series) But from what I've heard, VSL are still the best tools for what you do.



Thanks so much richhickey. This helps a ton. I've done some bigger orchestral pieces already, but right now I'm working on 3 simultaneously, and each has presented its own frustrations, which is why I started to have a wandering eye for something else 

Cheers!
Dave


----------



## Dear Villain (Nov 27, 2019)

BlackDorito said:


> Dave,
> 
> Since and I have used both VSL and Spitfire a lot (although not BBCSO), let me comment on a few of your questions.
> 
> ...



It's so kind of you to take the time to write such a detailed response, Chris. Thanks so much! I'm taking this all to heart. Your no. 5 point actually really gave me a moment to think: I'm always going to write scores without first "listening to the samples" (as in, old school, hear it in my head and write the notes down...except using software instead of pen/paper). Only when I did some DAW-exclusive pieces a few years ago, did I rely on being inspired by the sounds of the libraries. So, this likely will mean that after I've notated a full score and brought it in to Cubase to create the mock-up, the Spitfire libraries will not be influencing what I write, but I'll have to make sure they can produce what I've already notated. It seems I'll be destined to have few fans on the VI forum going forward  lol

Cheers!
Dave


----------



## Dear Villain (Nov 27, 2019)

Jimmy Hellfire said:


> I also don't own BBCSO, but a ton of other SF stuff, including the symphonic libraries, as well as VSL. From what I've seen in walkthroughs etc., BBC is very much in line with what you can expect from them. So, FWIW, some experieces:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Jimmy, thank you for an amazingly detailed response. I've valued your insight on numerous other threads (most famously going back to the Syncrhon fiasco) and appreciate your steering me away from something that might not match my musical output. I'll look at the Orchestral Tools libraries, but will probably just stick with my current setup (at least I now have added Dimension strings and brass, which I've yet to use in any of my productions, but are currently being deployed in these 3 orchestral works).

Cheers!
Dave
p.s. you, BlackDorito and a few others saved me a big hit to my wallet (after some expensive home renos the past 2 months!) I'll buy you a beer if you're ever in town (just consider all of Southern Ontario "town")


----------



## Zero&One (Nov 28, 2019)

Dear Villain said:


> p.s. you, BlackDorito and a few others saved me a big hit to my wallet ...



You sir however... cost me this

@BlessedFountain can also take some blame


----------



## Dear Villain (Nov 29, 2019)

James H said:


> You sir however... cost me this
> 
> @BlessedFountain can also take some blame



What did I do?  You'll love your Cube. It's been my musical mistress for 5 years! 

Dave


----------



## Zero&One (Nov 29, 2019)

Dear Villain said:


> What did I do?  You'll love your Cube. It's been my musical mistress for 5 years!
> 
> Dave



Posting amazing music, you musical temptress you 
I’ve just finished installing and had a very quick play of some patches ... it’s a thing of beauty isn’t it.


----------



## Pier (Nov 29, 2019)

I got Nucleus before even checking VSL because I assumed it would be prohibitively expensive... and I kinda regret it.

Nucleus is great but for the same price I could have gotten a couple of VSL special editions which have more articulations, better sound IMO, and better sampler than Kontakt. Also it's something I can grow on and add more stuff from VSL.

Oh well, next BF!


----------



## Oliver (Nov 29, 2019)

i just bought several synchronized editions and they are sooooo good. would never consider BBCSO for that...
(ah JFYI i have many SF Libraries)


----------



## Michael Antrum (Nov 29, 2019)

I bought the synchronised special editions bundle on intro. I had a sizeable discount voucher from one fo the distributors, and I'd had a good month, so I though what the hell .... It was a complete impulse purchase.

I absolutely love them. I've just upgraded the Steinway D274 Lite that comes with SE1 to the Standard version - I'm just can't stop playing it. I also just added Big Bang Andromeda (it is big) to go with the free version.

I really like the cut of their jib.


----------



## Zero&One (Nov 29, 2019)

Pier Bover said:


> I got Nucleus before even checking VSL because I assumed it would be prohibitively expensive... and I kinda regret it.



I was the same, I did wonder why so many Cube questions were popping up. As I have some other stuff the price was even lower. I couldn't let this pass at that price.
Nucleus does look and sounds really nice though. I'll still be trawling through the presets by the time you've finished your 3rd symphony.. and it'll be BF again!


----------



## Zero&One (Nov 29, 2019)

Michael Antrum said:


> I also just added Big Bang Andromeda (it is big) to go with the free version.



What are your thoughts on it? I bagged it the other day and it made me smile, a very big smile. Probably the reason I just caned 1k on their store.

Like you say "I really like the cut of their jib.'


----------



## sostenuto (Nov 29, 2019)

Many SF libs, some OT, yet aggressive efforts, starting with Smart Sphere thru Andromeda, have moved me far closer to VSL. 
Personal composing, orchestrating talents lag far behind most Users here, but still rewarding in many ways.
Cost gap from BBCSO to Cube Full is a major challenge. Not at all sure how well the Standard Library would suffice for near term.


----------



## Michael Antrum (Nov 29, 2019)

James H said:


> What are your thoughts on it? I bagged it the other day and it made me smile, a very big smile. Probably the reason I just caned 1k on their store.
> 
> Like you say "I really like the cut of their jib.'



1k - Ouch ! 

Andromeda is just ridiculously good fun. It's like the fist time I got my hands on an orchestral hit patch in the 90's. Or discovering girls. You just can't help yourself.

But I've watched the videos, and its so much more than that. There's some clever stuff to discover in there.

I'm so seriously close to picking up the cube standard....


----------



## Zero&One (Nov 29, 2019)

Michael Antrum said:


> I'm so seriously close to picking up the cube standard....



Exactly yeah. The video is great I agree, at first I thought it was just a big boom library, but it's so much more. I guess it's a bit like Aperture but on steroids.

It was actually 800 as I had previous items, and Mirx Teldex slipped itself onto the cart last minute!
I basically written Cube off as a dream, there's no way I could fund that. I just resigned myself to the fact I might pick some of the VI Series on the odd occasional offer. But owning 'parts' of it always put me off and I would moved on.
So when I seen the price I had to get it. For the price it's what I would called a serious no-brainer, the instruments are just beautiful and the content is huge. I'd have probably spent that amount by Christmas anyway on piecemeal versions of other stuff, so I'm really really happy.


----------



## Frank1985 (Nov 29, 2019)

this black november has been a nightmare - the endless trawling through youtube listening to demos, trying to decide between this library and that library - should i go dry, wet, or both - ensembles or individual instruments - pestering this forum with questions that have probably be answered so many times the mods must feel like they're trapped in a groundhog day. i'm thinking of just getting the cube and being done with it. Either that, or wait till xmas and grab the Albion and Olof Arnaulds bundles. Ideally I would like to add a dry library just to practice my mixing chops and alleviate the guilty feeling of working strictly with OOTB orchestral libraries. So much indecision - it's like this is the final black friday ever and not taking advantage of every deal in existence will result in a lifetime of regret and penance.


----------



## Jean Phi (Nov 30, 2019)

Thanks for your insights Dear Villain, they are most helpfull on this post. I listened to your tracks they are stunning. Very pleased to hear experiences VSL users. I would have hundreds of question, but most important for me now is : 
Do you still use VI instruments versions since you have Dimension series ? 
Do dimension series replace solo + chamber + orchestral VI series (must be ressource demanding I guess)
To you run an orchestral session with slave PCs, or do you have a single computer ( would be pleased to know really what's needed to make it run smoothly, on VSL site, they recommand i5 and 4GB of RAM, seriously I can't believe that !!!
Do you know if new ultra fast SSD replace large amount of RAM with ultra fast disk steaming ? (I was thinking of a mac mini as a slave computer to my old macbook pro 2011 !, but apple ram is so expansive !)


----------



## mscp (Nov 30, 2019)

Frank1985 said:


> this black november has been a nightmare - the endless trawling through youtube listening to demos, trying to decide between this library and that library - should i go dry, wet, or both - ensembles or individual instruments - pestering this forum with questions that have probably be answered so many times the mods must feel like they're trapped in a groundhog day. i'm thinking of just getting the cube and being done with it. Either that, or wait till xmas and grab the Albion and Olof Arnaulds bundles. Ideally I would like to add a dry library just to practice my mixing chops and alleviate the guilty feeling of working strictly with OOTB orchestral libraries. So much indecision - it's like this is the final black friday ever and not taking advantage of every deal in existence will result in a lifetime of regret and penance.



It is indeed a nightmare, especially if you have a specific budget. I hope you make the best decision for yourself and welcome!


----------



## RogiervG (Jan 5, 2020)

Iswhatitis said:


> The Symphonc Cube Full Library should be going for $500 or less. I’m sure in time it will be.




Indeed, it's quite old. Ancient even in technological perspective.
Still I disagree on the pricepoint. 500 is too cheap, i'd say approx. 1K. (but also free access to the synchron editions of the libs and player), say 850 or something. And it must include the pro player not the basic one. And for 50usd extra get one mirx room ontop?


----------



## Pixelpoet1985 (Jan 5, 2020)

Iswhatitis said:


> It’s way older than that. The 24-bit VSL Symphonic Cube is based on the even older recordings in the 16-bit Orchestral Cube which is around 20 years old. Though the VI interface is not that old the sounds are extremely dated as I used to adore VSL, which I still own and basically never use anymore. I could see buying the VI Super Package Full Library one day way off in the future when they chop the selling price all the way down to say $3,000 total from its over $12k list. To me, it’s extremely old already and way over priced. I’m sure it’s only a matter of time till we start seeing 50% sales and more on this very old VSL library as they have already begun to do so with the Symphonic Cube. I feel VSL still has value but not at the price point they want. The Symphonc Cube Full Library should be going for $500 or less. I’m sure in time it will be.



It's old, but no way dated. It's still better than most of the newer stuff out there. The scripting and playability (e.g. legato, repetitions) have no real competition, in my opinion. And the recordings are top-notch.


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Jan 5, 2020)

Iswhatitis said:


> It’s way older than that. The 24-bit VSL Symphonic Cube is based on the even older recordings in the 16-bit Orchestral Cube which is around 20 years old. Though the VI interface is not that old the sounds are extremely dated



Good recordings never become "dated" though, especially since we're talking particularly natural sounding samples here. A trombone will always sound like a trombone. IMO some of those old VSL brass and woodwinds sounds are still among the best, especially when you're looking for a very natural and realistic representation of the instruments. Also, one would think that recording standards must have universally gotten even better since then, but that's actually not even always the case ... these old VSL recordings, from a fidelity standpoint, beat a whole bunch of stuff that came out in recent years.

People do prefer grandiose and cinematic sounds today of course, and in the professional world, there's probably more need for those too. But just saying. I do agree that the old VSL line should probably be more affordable at this point in time.


----------



## Zero&One (Jan 5, 2020)

Iswhatitis said:


> The Symphonc Cube Full Library should be going for $500 or less. I’m sure in time it will be.



I wouldn't be holding your breath on that one  

As a recent Cube owner I'd say these are still better than most. The modern libraries I own do include new techniques like tuning issues, bumps, noises. Something VSL don't seem to have.
I agree you should get Pro Player though.


----------



## RogiervG (Jan 5, 2020)

Anyway.. pricedrops (static) will come soon enough for the old samples/scripting range of VSL libs.
No other way forwards than that. Competition has better offerings for the same cash in general.
Tech has changed significantly,meaning both the way to record, and to edit/script it properly.
VSL is trying to play catch-up, and i'm sure they will succeed. However, pricepoint wise, it's way to expensive. It's like you pay the price of a brand new super car (very expensive), for a commodity one.
Commodity is good, it's usable, it's fine...Nothing wrong with it!
But... a super car is a league of it's own and is niche/elite and is priced accordingly.
VSL (the old one) is nothing special anymore, and the pricepoint should reflect that. It doesn't at current times, it's still priced like the old days when they products where super cars in relation to competition, those days have long gone.


----------



## Zero&One (Jan 5, 2020)

But they are still special, that's the point. Most other libraries are surpassed within a few years by their _own_ products in fact.
Be no different to say Spitfire Symphony Orchestra should be now $300 as it's old and tired. Just as crazy in my opinion.

edit: the comparison to Cube & BBC was obviously during both mega sales. Comparison now is a different thing.


----------



## RogiervG (Jan 5, 2020)

Zero&One said:


> But they are still special, that's the point. Most other libraries are surpassed within a few years by their _own_ products in fact.
> Be no different to say Spitfire Symphony Orchestra should be now $300 as it's old and tired. Just as crazy in my opinion.


I do too feel that SSO should be lower in price too. Sure.. but not as much as VSL. VSL is way way way older in that regard.

Talking about crazy:
In current times, willingly paying the old pricing for an old product, which has already being succeeded by the same developer. It's odd.
With cars, why on earth would you pay for an older model car the same amount as the newer model, where the new one clearly has everything better?
You wouldn't.
So why for sample libs? it's the same principle: it's still being sold, but it's old. But the price is the same as years ago without logical reason.

I'm done with that.. (and many people are, that why they hunt sales, with big discounts. Otherwise it's just not worth the money in relation to tech/oldness)


----------



## Zero&One (Jan 5, 2020)

RogiervG said:


> I do too feel that SSO should be lower in price too. Sure.. but not as much as VSL. VSL is way way way older in that regard.



But isn't that because of these non stop sale sale sale era? It's worth the money 100% to my ears, both of them with BBC included.
Yes it's expensive. But the content and quality of VSL is still unmatched in many areas. So I'd say it's worth the premium. Age hasn't anything to do with it, if the content is still excellent.


----------



## RogiervG (Jan 5, 2020)

I'm not saying VSL (the old libs) are bad, no. But it is aging. and you can hear it too. (scripting wise, sample wise etc)
And as said, VSL has made newer libs, with newer technology, that has even better tech features etc..
(synchron series e.g. not the synchron SE, but the full libs)
And comparing those prices to eachother: old vs new, there is barely no difference and that's the point.


----------



## Zero&One (Jan 5, 2020)

New love for me  
Glad we met and I can come off the "Tinder for Strings" where there's many new sexy offerings... but many of them are still pigs with lipstick.


----------



## gamma-ut (Jan 5, 2020)

Maybe not so much in comparison with the physically modelled or assisted libraries like SM, SWAM and AaronVenture (though I haven't tried that last one yet) but the playability of VSL with the Pro player remains very good - I find it way easier in combination with breath and mod controllers to get lines that sound convincing (to me at least) with VSL than with the newer, shinier libraries where you're having to do a lot of editing after the initial recording or effectively stitching together pre-cooked mini-phrases - which I'm sure is effective for short cues but is a PITA for longer compositions that aren't tied to media cues.

Plus, there is the ready ability to place them in a wide variety of spaces that isn't the case with the wet libraries from Spitfire etc.


----------



## Pixelpoet1985 (Jan 5, 2020)

I don't think that VSL is (too) expensive. Sure, you don't have microphone options, but a ton of articulations, way (!) better scripting, consistent editing and playability. I have many libraries, and there isn't a single one that comes close to VSL. The others maybe sound better out-of-the-box, but the scripting is really unsurpassed. The guys from Vienna had a very good concept from the very beginning. For example, I mentioned repetition samples in my earlier post. Back then they realised that these are important, and they definitely are, but no other library (with just a very few exceptions) make playable or convincing repetitions. I don't want to name libraries here. And this is just one example.

I think many have VSL Special Editions and compare them with other developers. I invested in the full cube, and I can tell you, this can't be compared. You need time and have to learn the instruments, and they sound better than any other library out there. With VSL you can achieve all what the other libraries promise and even more, because it's more flexible. You can do both classical and film music, since you have the articulations the others don't have.

I'm not subjective at all ... I don't regret my VSL purchases, but I regret the time and money I wasted on other libraries.


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Jan 5, 2020)

Iswhatitis said:


> For VSL users who have spent so much money on their libraries it’s very hard for them to be objective and come to the realization that other than a few newer titles like Synchron Pianos & Percussion the old VSL Symphonic Cube and its off shoots are no where near the class of OT Berlin Series and the Metropolitan Arks, Spitfire HZP HZS SSO SStO and BBCSO, CineBrass, Cinematic Studio Series, and OT Junkie XL Brass for film scoring. VSL is still nice to do classical and baroque mockups but the days of yore 13-20 years ago when VSL rules the Kingdom have died. I own VSL, I used to adore those libraries, but I have not wanted to use them compared to all the newer ones mentioned for a dozen years. One can certainly still use and enjoy the VSL stuff today but it’s not in the league of Cinematic Studio, Spitfire and Berlin for film and tv projects. Now if your use of VSL is simply to make a mock-up score to demo for a director, producer and studio then it’s perfectly fine for that usage before working with live musicians and you can still ride that ole horse into the sunset, but it’s archaic to use on modern film and tv projects as a finished product except for a handful of VSLs newer releases. I have compassion for VSL users who made such a large investment and feel married to their libraries and still want to believe that they are still taking their 12/20 years passed their prime has-been ex-Prom Queen to the gala, but she ain’t the beauty queen anymore and has not been for a very long time. Certainly VSL is perfectly fine for behind the scenes demos or classical mockups. But VSL lacks the warmth, dimension, and depth of realism and tone that these newer libraries offer. I get it, you fell in love a long time ago, love can certainly last a life time. Here’s to ole love 💕 I toast to thee 🤳🥂



It's a ridiculous notion that anyone who appreciates these libraries must be someone who invested tons of money a long time ago and now for some reason still has to justify their choice. Really exceptionally dumb, I must say.

I do regret some of my purchases ... but that pertains to some of the ones you tout as the new standard. Many of my VSL libs are still mainstays!


----------



## RogiervG (Jan 5, 2020)

I;m leaving this thread.. it's VSL fanboyism vs Non VSL fanboyism.
This discussion about price being too high, or the samples being sounding old or not..scripting etc..
Is neverending, with two camps in the opposite spectrum. it's an infinite loop of arguments, phrased differently i am afraid.

Let's make stop it, and shake hands


----------



## Zero&One (Jan 5, 2020)

I honestly stopped reading at


Iswhatitis said:


> If VSL would have simply gotten...



Sorry.


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Jan 5, 2020)

RogiervG said:


> I;m leaving this thread.. it's VSL fanboyism vs Non VSL fanboyism.
> This discussion about price being too high, or the samples being sounding old or not..scripting etc..
> Is neverending, with two camps in the opposite spectrum.



I don't know that I'm in a "camp" - I've got libraries from all the manufacturers that were just named here and the bigger part of it finds regular use. And I realize that the biggest nonsense in this thread didn't come from you, but I hate seeing the "fanboy" card being pulled - just always seems to come up when there's a narrative or agenda to be pushed.


----------



## Zero&One (Jan 5, 2020)

RogiervG said:


> Let's make stop it, and shake hands



Here’s mine 🤝

Shame as I feel talking as we did about sensible reductions and adding pro player etc are things devs watch and note. But then it went... yeah

Have a great day


----------



## Eloy (Jan 5, 2020)

Pixelpoet1985 said:


> I don't think that VSL is (too) expensive. Sure, you don't have microphone options, but a ton of articulations, way (!) better scripting, consistent editing and playability. I have many libraries, and there isn't a single one that comes close to VSL. The others maybe sound better out-of-the-box, but the scripting is really unsurpassed. The guys from Vienna had a very good concept from the very beginning. For example, I mentioned repetition samples in my earlier post. Back then they realised that these are important, and they definitely are, but no other library (with just a very few exceptions) make playable or convincing repetitions. I don't want to name libraries here. And this is just one example.
> 
> I think many have VSL Special Editions and compare them with other developers. I invested in the full cube, and I can tell you, this can't be compared. You need time and have to learn the instruments, and they sound better than any other library out there. With VSL you can achieve all what the other libraries promise and even more, because it's more flexible. You can do both classical and film music, since you have the articulations the others don't have.
> 
> I'm not subjective at all ... I don't regret my VSL purchases, but I regret the time and money I wasted on other libraries.


Pixelpoet1985,
I too had thought that the microphone option for VSL was limiting. Then I purchased MIR Pro and started moving the 2nd microphone (in my case Teldex) to the back of the room (using VSL samples), adjusting its DB’s and changing out the different microphone options and......wow! What a difference and as an added plus my Berlin series samples now worked in the same room as my VSL samples.


----------



## gamma-ut (Jan 5, 2020)

In my day, we had paragraphs.


----------



## Pixelpoet1985 (Jan 5, 2020)

Iswhatitis said:


> Also, if one is writing for film and tv, though MIR is great it’s not the right vibe since orchestras are recorded in large studios not concert halls for those mediums.



This is not true. MIR Pro offers a huge variety of ambiences. Teldex and Synchron Stage are scoring stages.

Even without reverb, VSL's silent stage sounds quite nice, it's actually a very small scoring stage with a neutral sound. It's not that different to Teldex or Sony or whatever.


----------



## Pixelpoet1985 (Jan 5, 2020)

Iswhatitis said:


> That’s why VSL tends to work better for classical music.



And it's good, isn't it? The other libraries don't, they are not that flexible.

Film music is classical music. VSL can do film music.


----------



## Pixelpoet1985 (Jan 5, 2020)

Iswhatitis said:


> But VSL stands alone in that they are the most reluctant to lower prices on their older libraries because they keep wanting to believe they are the best.



In my opinion, they still are – by far.




Iswhatitis said:


> Now do the older VSL libraries still sound as good or better than Berlin and Spitfire, it’s not even close. The Symphonic Cube is like a baseball mitt from the 1920s, it looks great on a shelf.



No, they can sound like any library. Berlin and Spitfire are great out-of-the-box, but the scripting isn't good and will never be at the same level as VSL. The VI (Pro) player is better than Kontakt and even Spitfire's and OT's new player. They now have features which VSL had years ago.


----------



## Pixelpoet1985 (Jan 5, 2020)

Eloy said:


> Pixelpoet1985,
> I too had thought that the microphone option for VSL was limiting. Then I purchased MIR Pro and started moving the 2nd microphone (in my case Teldex) to the back of the room (using VSL samples), adjusting its DB’s and changing out the different microphone options and......wow! What a difference and as an added plus my Berlin series samples now worked in the same room as my VSL samples.



Yes, that's true. MIR Pro makes a huge difference, I'm still figuring out the correct settings. There are so many variables ... 

Of course, it doesn't sound exactly like Berlin, but it comes very close, in my opinion.


----------



## BlackDorito (Jan 5, 2020)

As someone who has broadly speaking moved on from VSL to Spitfire/CSS/OT I can say that, as I have recounted in some fashion on other threads, the out-of-the-box-yness of 'wet' libraries has helped me in two major ways: I don't need to fiddle with room parameters as much, leaving more mental energy for actual music making; and I can do most projects on a single master PC instead of having to fire up a slave to run VEP/MIR/etc., with all the attendant overhead. Still, VSL SE was a great way to start. I look back fondly on that time and those projects (.. not so long ago).


----------



## dcoscina (Jan 5, 2020)

VSL sounds nice with individual instruments but I find it suffers from the "organ" effect when layering a lot of the instruments together. I use it only with other libraries to augment. The winds are still lovely and I think their legatos are second to none. But BBC blends better together as a whole in my experience (and I own both).


----------



## CT (Jan 5, 2020)

Pixelpoet1985 said:


> and they sound better than any other library out there.



I don't want to strike up more acrimony here, but... I would be *very* interested in hearing one shred of sonic proof of this.

I've heard exactly two composers do great stuff with VSL, but when they've applied their formidable skills elsewhere, the results are markedly better. That litmus test, and my own experience with VSL, tells the story for me.


----------



## Dear Villain (Jan 7, 2020)

miket said:


> I don't want to strike up more acrimony here, but... I would be *very* interested in hearing one shred of sonic proof of this.
> 
> I've heard exactly two composers do great stuff with VSL, but when they've applied their formidable skills elsewhere, the results are markedly better. That litmus test, and my own experience with VSL, tells the story for me.



Guy Bacos and Jay Bacal?


----------



## Dear Villain (Jan 7, 2020)

Jean Phi said:


> Thanks for your insights Dear Villain, they are most helpfull on this post. I listened to your tracks they are stunning. Very pleased to hear experiences VSL users. I would have hundreds of question, but most important for me now is :
> Do you still use VI instruments versions since you have Dimension series ?
> Do dimension series replace solo + chamber + orchestral VI series (must be ressource demanding I guess)
> To you run an orchestral session with slave PCs, or do you have a single computer ( would be pleased to know really what's needed to make it run smoothly, on VSL site, they recommand i5 and 4GB of RAM, seriously I can't believe that !!!
> Do you know if new ultra fast SSD replace large amount of RAM with ultra fast disk steaming ? (I was thinking of a mac mini as a slave computer to my old macbook pro 2011 !, but apple ram is so expansive !)



I'm sorry I missed this Jean Phi. Thanks for your kind words 

To answer your questions:

I still use VI instruments alongside Dimension (I just got Dimension and have only released one project with it).

Dimension don't replace anything for me...they're an additional tool. I still love the orchestral/solo/chamber series and use them all.

I have only a single computer, purchased 5 years ago from a U.S. DAW builder, Studio Cat. It's an i7 with 64 GB ram and SSD drives. Never had any problems streaming VSL samples at all, even with Mir Pro.

I'm not a tech guy, but this single one box solution suits me perfectly, and even after 5 years, doesn't show any signs of slowing down. Of course, I'm not even close to a power user like many on this forum, in that I only have my VSL libraries, Komplete, and a few solo instruments. That's the benefit of not having to write music that relies on the coolest/latest and greatest libraries, but on the tried and true sounds of an orchestra 

Cheers!
Dave


----------



## CT (Jan 7, 2020)

Dear Villain said:


> Guy Bacos and Jay Bacal?



No, they aren't who I had in mind actually.


----------



## robgb (Jan 8, 2020)

Iswhatitis said:


> Most film and tv scores are dripping with loads of reverb. This is where VSL really struggles and Spitfire naturally excels


Define struggle. To my mind, adding reverb is far less of a struggle than taking it away.


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Jan 8, 2020)

It's not even true that all media scores are dripping with reverb. Unless you're narrowing your whole field of interest and usage of sample libraries to one very specific type of production (which more often than not also happens to be insufferable garbage). If that's the case, well, then ... have at it, much success and be happy with your choices, all is great


----------



## babylonwaves (Jan 8, 2020)

Iswhatitis said:


> Not all media scores, but film scoring engineers, mixers and re-recording mixers usually (not always) drench orchestra recordings with verb especially for big budget studio productions and films requiring midsized to large orchestras.


A good example of a relatively dry and also modern score is HGW's "The Meg". It was recorded in Vienna on the Synchron Stage by Bernd M. who also did record a lot of the Synchron series instrument in the same space for VSL.


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Jan 8, 2020)

Iswhatitis said:


> Not all media scores, but film scoring engineers, mixers and re-recording mixers usually (not always) drench orchestra recordings with verb especially for big budget studio productions and films requiring midsized to large orchestras. Don’t blame the messenger, it is what it is. Plus, in the end, often music is so buried underneath dialogue sound effects and sound design in a mix does any of this even matter??? ~



So if they're doing it, why are you having such inexplicable trouble with it? Sounds more like blaming the tools for user inability.


----------



## John R Wilson (Jan 8, 2020)

Iswhatitis said:


> What I really would love is an orchestra library that included all 8 dynamic layers with plenty of RR and legato choices of an orchestra for strings woodwinds and brass (this doesn’t exist quite yet): ppp pp p mp mf f ff fff.



EWHO already has quite a few dynamic layers (not quite 8, I believe most are at 4 or 5 dynamic layers), has plenty of RR (16 for strings Staccatissmo) and plenty of legato choices for strings, brass and woodwind (Although woodwinds are not the best choice out their). EWHO is still probably the closest to a complete orchestral package with these characteristics.


----------



## Zero&One (Jan 8, 2020)

I'm more surprised people are replying to these comments (including me).


----------



## markleake (Jan 8, 2020)

Iswhatitis said:


> Not all media scores, but film scoring engineers, mixers and re-recording mixers usually (not always) drench orchestra recordings with verb especially for big budget studio productions and films requiring midsized to large orchestras. Don’t blame the messenger, it is what it is. Plus, in the end, often music is so buried underneath dialogue sound effects and sound design in a mix does any of this even matter??? ~


Re: Your response to @Zero&One. Ahhh... but you _did_ start using the enter key, hey. No need to be a dick about it.

I kind of agree with you in some regards. It makes more sense to use libraries that are more naturally reverberant when looking for that sound, which is often. And it is uncommon for me to hear mockups done with VSL where I think the libraries sound natural. Not to say other libs don't suffer issues also. Which brings me to my point...

Where I don't agree is the generalisations. I have some VSL that I got recently. Comparing it to various other libs I have, the ones you've mentioned a few times, the VSL stuff is actually better in some regards, not so good in others. Some instruments stand out, some are not as good. Like any library developer, you learn what they are good at and use them for their strengths.

These blanket "VSL is bad/old, others are new/good", or "VSL is still the best" statements... I know enough not to believe either side.


----------



## ism (Jan 8, 2020)

Iswhatitis said:


> Your average listener is not going to hear the difference between OT, Cinesamples, Spitfire, VSL, CSS/CSB, LASS/LADD, Symphobia and others, neither are the vast swath of producers or directors, so this is really about composer tradecraft and what composers prefer. Let’s all remember this.




This argument surfaces once and a while. But can I suggest that the question isn't whether your average listener is going to "hear" the difference - with "hear" being understood in the cognitive sense that we employ when we evaluate libs for purchase. The question is whether the average user will "feel" the difference. And this is where I think there is an enormous difference between VSL, CSS, SSO etc.


Case in point - I saw Little Women yesterday, and there's an emotional point in the film where the Desplat score has a noticeable different ambience to the strings. It's a simple part for I'd say a chamber sized string orchestra, but much rawer, that the earlier lushness. 

More SCS with lots of close mice than CSS or VSL is maybe how I would approximate it in terms of sample libraries - and it's perhaps my experience with listening to sample libraries with this cognitive hat that lest me understand what's different about the strings in this moment. (Although I doubt any sample library could capture the quality of that cue) .


And in the film, this sound and this cue works immensely well, capturing the raw emotion of the moment, shifting from the more picturesque visuals of much of the film to the rawness of the moment.


You average listener might very not notice that there's anything different here in the reverb or the spatialization or the hall ambience or the section size or the mic positions - they'll be (spoiler alert) thinking about Beth. 

But they will *feel* this difference coming through in the strings - no longer the strings of a lush picturesque period piece, but something entirely more intimate (*) - without even thinking about the recording technique that goes into creating this feeling, the that is music at its best.


So my point is that maybe your average user can't tell the different between libraries, cognitively. But musically, this is kind of irrelevant.

(*) Actually the score here works brilliantly with the direction, which takes the conventional period piece narrative, and remixes it a little to deliver plenty of the lush, sentimental, picturesque period piece, but also the bring out the book's percent proto-feminist, and in fact almost proto-postmodern self referentially in its form. Its really a superb piece of film making.


----------



## Alex Fraser (Jan 8, 2020)

I like it wet because I'm laaaaazy and don't want to have to go through the extra steps of setting up a virtual space. I'm an ex-VSL user and whilst I appreciate the amount of control one has in a VSL heavy setup...well, I'm all about the short cuts now. Judge away.


----------



## BlackDorito (Jan 8, 2020)

Iswhatitis said:


> VSL is like an old childhood best friend that I don’t play with anymore whom I used to hang out with all the time back in the day.


This analogy kinda sums it up for me as well. But maybe its time to invite your old BF to hang with your new crew. I've found that blending the VSL flute or clarinet, with a local reverb, can work on top of wet woodwinds (sounds a bit obscene). I didn't have the same success blending the VSL strings. Or to put it another way, I've become a fan of blending string libraries for the purpose of getting less-than-perfect sound, and I've gotten better results blending solos (Tina Guo, Joshua Bell) and chamber (SCS, BDT) to add complexity to the basic battery of SSS or CSS (*good* complexity).


----------



## robgb (Jan 8, 2020)

Iswhatitis said:


> Adding verb to VSL definitely helps but regardless of what kind of verb or how much you add VSL still sounds thinner, less lush, more lifeless, less real, less warm, less natural and less vivid than Spitfire and OT libraries.


We'll have to disagree about this. I own VSL's Opus 1 and I find it quite beautiful sounding, especially when treated properly with delay and reverb. The bonus is that it can sit pretty much anywhere you want it to sit in a mix, thanks to that out-of-the-box dry sound.

I own two Spitfire libraries and find that, with one of them at least, the hall sound is more a hindrance than a help. Sure it sounds great out of the box, but when it comes time to mix it can be problematic because it is difficult to reduce baked-in ambience.

Libraries with lush hall/reverb ambience are good for only one thing: that lush hall/reverb sound. And that sound is largely out of your control.

That said, dongles annoy the shit out of me, which is why I would urge people to look for old used copies of VSL—back before they moved away from Kontakt.


----------



## robgb (Jan 8, 2020)

gamma-ut said:


> In my day, we had paragraphs.


GET OFF MY LAWN!!!


----------



## Pixelpoet1985 (Jan 8, 2020)

Iswhatitis said:


> VSL is like an old childhood best friend that I don’t play with anymore whom I used to hang out with all the time back in the day. For composers with VSL that have yet to buy Cinesamples OT Spitfire or Cinematic Studio, it’s not like anyone has to switch to the newer libraries. VSL is more than capable of doing the job if you have spent a fortune buying it. Some artists prefer oils to watercolor, others prefer sculpting and want a chisel and hammer. I feel like Spitfire and OT are more like painting with oil and VSL is more like painting with watercolor.



It's true, I don't know why I'm answering here ... It makes me sad when people talk this way. This was the reason why I stopped buying VSL libraries in the past. But finally, I realised that these are the best ones (for me) in terms of quality and playability. Sure, if you take the special editions this isn't a fair comparison. If you take Dimension Brass or Dimension Strings, these really are the best libraries they offer, together with the woodwinds. 

I also like the raw silent stage sound. It's a very small scoring stage, so I don't understand when people say VSL doesn't blend. I think they blend perfectly together, because they are all recorded in the same room (as all the other libraries). I have other libraries (e.g. BBCSO) and I'm always coming back to VSL. With MIR Pro I can achieve very good and real results, similar to Teldex or Sony. Some day I will make a comparison video ... Because, as I said, it's so sad that people are talking about VSL this way. The only fact is they don't know how to use these libraries properly. This is the only (!) reason, in my opinion.

VSL sounds real and plays real, it's for professionals, BBCSO isn't. There are too many drawbacks: bad editing, bad scripting, few velocity layers, bad crossfading and a lack of important articulations (e.g. détaché). These "lite" performance legatos ("lite" compared to SSO) are nice to have, but don't sound real with these staccato overlays. You can't play fast legatos without triggering them. VSL has dedicated fast legato and trill patches, for example.


----------



## robgb (Jan 8, 2020)

Pixelpoet1985 said:


> I also like the raw silent stage sound. It's a very small scoring stage, so I don't understand when people say VSL doesn't blend.


This is usually said by people who either a) don't know how; or b) have no interest in learning how to mix. It takes approximately half a minute to set up a room and hall sound to make these libraries blend. And if you're having trouble, blame the baked-in sound of those other libraries, not VSL.

If VSL would get rid of that damn dongle and their ridiculous loss/failure/replacement policy, I would recommend them to everyone. Instead I suggest picking up Spitfire's drier Studio Strings Core, pair them with Soundiron's bone dry Hyperion Strings Elements and enjoy the control this combination affords you.


----------



## ism (Jan 8, 2020)

Pixelpoet1985 said:


> VSL sounds real and plays real, it's for professionals, BBCSO isn't.




At the end of the day however, there's a lot of music that I'm much rather actually listen to when realized by BBCSO that VSL. It's not trying to compete with VSL on depth of sampling, it's a very, very different sound with a very, very different emotional quality.


And again, I really think that "realism" is not the most relevant concept here, rather its the textures of some kind of emotional quality to the sound. And which I simply don't believe can be satisfactorily be replicated with even the best reverbs or mixing skill.


The converse is true of course. There's music that VSL realizes better than anything else, generally in the more classical regime, but not exclusively. Whereas the quality of SSO is more filmic (for a certain understanding of the word filmic), and BBCSO is more ... something else - Debussy aways comes to mind when I hear the quality of the BBCSO sound for some reason, but don't ask me why exactly.


Perhaps its stylistic, or perceptual - perhaps people have different ears, or listen for different qualities in music, or focus on different perceptual details. 

But the different is real, and I don't see any reason why can't respect our differences on this.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jan 8, 2020)

Pixelpoet1985 said:


> VSL sounds real and plays real, it's for professionals, BBCSO isn't.



All a matter of personal opinion, it really comes down to programming. I have yet to hear (after all these years), a convincing piece using VSL.


----------



## Zero&One (Jan 8, 2020)

I started in this thread owning some various VSL (and basic player) and BBC. I now have Cube full and Pro Player and still BBC.
I spent last part of December with Pro player and it has changed my view drastically. I love it and the content I bought. I still also love BBC and nothing has changed that. They are both great.

I keep reading the comments of a "modern sound" used when comparing though. Did these newer libraries use only new violins, new mics and new hall... or is it maybe the demo content plays modern type trailer music vs VSL more classical style. Either way, I'm not a huge fan of modern scores so I'll stick with these dusty old samples and BBC SO for my ventures.

There's no wrong choice if you like the sound and enjoy them. Both these tick my boxes.


----------



## robgb (Jan 8, 2020)

Wolfie2112 said:


> All a matter of personal opinion, it really comes down to programming. I have yet to hear (after all these years), a convincing piece using VSL.


I have yet to hear a convincing piece when it comes to any sample library if it is compared to the real thing. But then our target audience hears GPO 5 and thinks it's the real thing.


----------



## robgb (Jan 8, 2020)

Iswhatitis said:


> Just throwing a verb or using MIR on VSL will definitely help, but I find the strings and brass lack depth and realistic color when compared to OT and Spitfire.


Just throwing reverb on anything is a mistake. You have to know how to use it properly. As for the rest of your statement, color me unconvinced.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jan 8, 2020)

Iswhatitis said:


> I did a finished score in the 90s for a tv studio whose producers actually thought my JV-1080s score was a live orchestra recording



Same here! I did a pilot series on Court TV years ago using only the sounds from my JV-2080 (with orchestral expansions), they also thought it was the real deal.


----------



## robgb (Jan 8, 2020)

Wolfie2112 said:


> Same here! I did a pilot series on Court TV years ago using only the sounds from my JV-2080 (with orchestral expansions), they also thought it was the real deal.


I certainly hope you didn't dissuade them of this notion.


----------



## CT (Jan 8, 2020)

robgb said:


> This is usually said by people who either a) don't know how; or b) have no interest in learning how to mix.





Pixelpoet1985 said:


> VSL sounds real and plays real, it's for professionals, BBCSO isn't.





Pixelpoet1985 said:


> The only fact is they don't know how to use these libraries properly. This is the only (!) reason, in my opinion.



Yes, this kind of snobby BS is a great way to ensure that you don't get the same kind of thing in response from naysayers.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jan 8, 2020)

robgb said:


> Just throwing reverb on anything is a mistake. You have to know how to use it properly.



I'm from the school of "if it sounds good, then it's good". It's not rocket science.


----------



## Pixelpoet1985 (Jan 8, 2020)

miket said:


> Yes, this kind of snobby BS is a great way to ensure that you don't get the same kind of thing in response from naysayers.



Sorry, but it's true. In return to your request, I want to hear one single example that shows that Spitfire can do a classical demo in a convincing way. I haven't heard one yet. All this talking about VSL is classical .... classical is the foundation, and if a library can't handle this, sorry. All this love for Spitfire here, they are way overrated, VSL is way underrated. If you prefer a wet sound, it's good, I prefer quality.

I will ever stick to my opinion. My point was not the reverb thing, I kept on talking about playability. And in this regard VSL is awesome (of course it's not sample modeling or the infinite series, but I prefer it to Spitfire and others). And again: In terms of quality, BBCSO is lightyears ahead behind VSL, and this is what the thread is all about. And for me this quality means it's for professionals.

I'm disappointed of my Spitfire purchase and this will be my very last one. The same is true for the studio series, although the sound is near identical to the silent stage, in my opinion. But VSL is way more playable.

Actually, I wanted to buy MSB (Audiobro) instead of BBCSO, and I'm very angry that I didn't. It's the same thing why this library has so little attention. All these discussions about room and wetness ... MSB and VSL sound "real" and not "epic", and I think many are not accustomed to this "raw" scoring stage sound, maybe ... It's okay if you work with a wet library, it's a workflow-thing, sure, but don't do VSL injustice saying it's "old", "lifeless" and it can't sound "modern". This is simply not true. I don't want to hear this anymore.


----------



## robgb (Jan 8, 2020)

miket said:


> Yes, this kind of snobby BS is a great way to ensure that you don't get the same kind of thing in response from naysayers.


There's nothing snobby about it at all. It's simply a fact that many people who use these libraries do not know how or are simply not interested in learning how to mix. Which is why they are attracted to libraries that are "pre-mixed" so to speak, and sound great out of the box. This does not mean that people who DO know how to mix avoid these libraries and it doesn't mean you're some kind of loser if that's the route you prefer.

But the fundamental reason that some people can't get a library to "sound good" or "blend" with other libraries is because they don't know what they're doing. So I would encourage every composer who has to present his work to someone else for approval (or to the world) to learn how to mix.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jan 8, 2020)

Pixelpoet1985 said:


> And again: In terms of quality, BBCSO is lightyears ahead behind VSL, and this is what the thread is all about. And for me this quality means it's for professionals.



That is simply a matter of personal taste, how can you claim BBCSO (or any other library) is lightyears behind VSL? They are two completely different libraries....with completely different sounds and programming. I'm a professional, but I don't prefer VSL, I actually earn money from using libs such as BBCSO. And I'm by no means a SF fanboy, it just happens I "clicked" with this particular library and it allows me to compose quickly and efficiently. Also, the big turnoff with VSL (for me, anyways), is their ridiculous licensing policies.


----------



## ism (Jan 8, 2020)

Pixelpoet1985 said:


> I will ever stick to my opinion.



The problem is that you're saying everyone who perceives music differently from yourself is ignorant and/or inferior to your (or at least VSL afficionado's) superior mixing skill. 

In fairness, I'm sure you're mixing skills are vastly superior to mine. But my opinions are formed from listening to music composed and mixed by people far better than myself.

Maybe your aesthetic perceptions of sound itself are also superior to my own. But again, whether it is or isn't it's entirely not the point.




robgb said:


> But the fundamental reason that some people can't get a library to "sound good" or "blend" with other libraries is because they don't know what they're doing.



So sure, some people are simply bad at mixing. But in general I simply don't believe this. I think the libraries we're talking about are fundamentally different, entirely by design, and the ability to emulate one to sound like another with technology (reverb, eq) is mediocre at best, and lipstick on a pig at worst.

Moreover, I think that there's something inherent, at the deepest rawest semiotic level of the musicality that people can feel, and that really makes a difference, that is there in the samples and the room and performances and probably a million other things that can't be fixed or faked in a DAW.

And I make this claim not based on my own experience with VSL and SSO, but based on the end results that I've hear from people far more skilled than myself.

Perhaps your powers of musical perception are superior to mine (very possible). But you accuse a lot of exceptionally talented people here (ie not myself particularly) of being ignorant and/or lacking skill.

And the point is that we're talking about perceptions of musicality. 

So it's ok for your artistic preferences to be different, and ok for your sonic perceptions to be different and even your understanding about what musicality is and what are its sonic dimensions (which indeed varies hugely between styles and cultures and eras and individuals).

But that doesn't mean that anyone else is wrong.


Again, I think its great that some people here prefer the VSL sound and that they share their perceptions and opinions here.

But I don't know why we can't all be right.


----------



## CT (Jan 8, 2020)

robgb said:


> But the fundamental reason that some people can't get a library to "sound good" or "blend" with other libraries is because they don't know what they're doing.



In terms of blending, yes, that's down to skill. You can blend anything with enough tinkering. 

The "sounds good" part though... "sounds good enough" is possible with the right skill, but no amount of digital trickery will make something sound as natural as actually recording it that way. I'm personally sick of "sounds good enough."


----------



## ism (Jan 8, 2020)

Wolfie2112 said:


> , how can you claim BBCSO (or any other library) is lightyears behind VSL?




Actually, you can make this claim - but there's a conflation here that causing all the tension.

VSL is much more deeply sampled. It has more dynamic layers. It is much better for certain types of very classical pieces. And the good folks at VSL have spent decades developing the VSL to get us there.


But the VSL already being exception good at the VSL sounds, BBCSO chooses a very different path, is a fabulous innovation not in deep sampling in sound and space capturing performances and a kind of musicality that I find kind of mind-blowing and "beyond" anything else available.



Unless of course, you're someone who can't possibly make music without ffff on your trombones. Then, as has been pointed out to us extensively and repeatedly, then BBCSO is truly and irredemably a piece of crap.

And ok, sure, its light years begins VSL for Vivladi and it's a piece of crap if you need to write something that breaks new ground and uber-hyper-aggressive fff trombone trailers. 

So remind me not to write anything that require hyper aggressive ffff trombones. Oh, wait every thread on BBCSO provides constant reminders of how truly diabolically bad it is for ffff trombone centric musicalities. One reviewer even made this point for something like seven hours straight.

Huge respect for what VSL and JXL do at their best in their uncontested mastery of their respected sweet spots. But how great is it that people who want to write that kind of music can buy those libraries while one such as myself can buy SSO or Venice or BBCSO or Light and Sound instead and start thinking things like "what would Debussy do?" instead.

So sure - light years ahead. In so far as one dimensional metaphor of distance makes any sense at all.


----------



## CT (Jan 8, 2020)

Pixelpoet1985 said:


> I don't want to hear this anymore.



You may need to abandon the internet, then, because while I don't think "old" is the right way to describe the VSL sound, "lifeless" comes far closer to the mark for me, and you're probably going to hear this sentiment from plenty of others, as well, whenever this subject comes up, henceforth and in perpetuity.

Years of this exact argument, pages of manifestos as to why VSL is actually wonderful and we're missing something, and a couple of brilliant composers squeezing something out of it have done absolutely nothing to change what my brain tells me, which is that the VSL sampling method is not the way to what I consider an organic, musical, and nuanced virtual performance.


----------



## ism (Jan 8, 2020)

miket said:


> because while I don't think "old" is the right way to describe the VSL sound, "lifeless" comes far closer to the mark for me, and you're probably going to hear this sentiment from plenty of others, as well, whenever this subject comes up, henceforth and in perpetuity.



I agree - but maybe we can texture this way of describing the VSL a bit.

Perhaps it's that for a particular type of work, the musicality draws attention to more abstract dimensions of the music - the harmony, the voice leading, the counterpoint, the form etc.

Wheres other type of music seek to bask more viscerally in the sheer sonorousness of the instruments.

Imagine an Olafur Arnalds cello piece mocked up with the VSL - I conjecture it would just make no sense at all. But a Bach prelude, well that's a lot more plausible.


Similarly, high-classical works that call for great and virtuosic precision are probably going to sound much, much better on VSL that on SSO, which might sound kind of ... maybe not lifeless, but maybe kind of vague, lacking the vibrant precision of the VSL ... so sure, let's call this a form of lifelessness also, when we work outside the sweet spots of the SSO (or whatever).



So I agree with you about the "lifelessness" of the VSL sound - especially for the kind of stuff I like to write. But I think its also that different compositional styles fundamentally conceptualize and express the life-fulness of the music in sometimes very different ways.


A litmus test might be to take all the spitfire demos, and mock them up with the VSL and then all the VSL demos and mock them up with the SSO.


I conjecture that for the most part it would be a terrible. And that, with probably a few exceptions where there is genuinely some overlap of sweet spots, the might all suffer some form of lifelessness, albeit in very different ways.


----------



## ptram (Jan 8, 2020)

Alex Fraser said:


> I like it wet because I'm laaaaazy and don't want to have to go through the extra steps of setting up a virtual space.


...but with multimic libraries, you have many more faders per channel to help procrastinate!

Paolo


----------



## Sarah Mancuso (Jan 8, 2020)

BBCSO might not be the perfect choice either, but I've yet to hear a VSL demo that sounds like a recording instead of like a bunch of mono close-mic midi tracks panned around with bad reverb.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jan 8, 2020)

Sarah Mancuso said:


> BBCSO might not be the perfect choice either, but I've yet to hear a VSL demo that sounds like a recording instead of like a bunch of mono close-mic midi tracks panned around with bad reverb.



+1. Not sure about the reverb, but I also have yet to hear something convincing after all these years.


----------



## AndyP (Jan 8, 2020)

Zero&One said:


> I started in this thread owning some various VSL (and basic player) and BBC. I now have Cube full and Pro Player and still BBC.
> I spent last part of December with Pro player and it has changed my view drastically. I love it and the content I bought. I still also love BBC and nothing has changed that. They are both great.
> 
> I keep reading the comments of a "modern sound" used when comparing though. Did these newer libraries use only new violins, new mics and new hall... or is it maybe the demo content plays modern type trailer music vs VSL more classical style. Either way, I'm not a huge fan of modern scores so I'll stick with these dusty old samples and BBC SO for my ventures.
> ...


My point exactly! Comparing VSL with BBCSO makes little sense. They both have their justification, I personally tend a little more towards VSL, but it depends on what I want to achieve.
Why does it always have to come down to a comparison that depends far too much on personal taste?
Why not be allowed to find both good?


----------



## CT (Jan 8, 2020)

ism said:


> Similarly, high-classical works that call for great and virtuosic precision are probably going to sound much, much better on VSL that on SSO, which might sound kind of ... maybe not lifeless, but maybe kind of vague, lacking the vibrant precision of the VSL



Not SSO, but I'm trying a little of Bach's 3rd Partita for violin with the BBCSO leader, and it sounds vibrantly precise to me! A bit frustrating to program, given that no developer (sample developers, as the sound of modeling does not work for me at all) has yet solved the issue of easily linking together different articulations (and I don't consider the VSL matrix approach a solution, since it still requires programming), but it is possible, and quite lovely sonically. 

I don't doubt that this will continue being the most worthwhile VI purchase I've made for years.

By that same token, there's nothing that says one can't do huge produced cinematic music or Olafur-flavored stuff with VSL. You won't get there as easily as with something that's made for that kind of music, but I think people underestimate how versatile most complete orchestral collections are. 

What a virtual orchestra can or can't do stylistically is not likely to ever be on my list of criticisms, because I think that range, while not unlimited, is far more defined by how you use it than by anything inherent in it. How it sounds, doing anything, will always be on that list, though.


----------



## BlackDorito (Jan 8, 2020)

ism said:


> A litmus test might be to take all the spitfire demos, and mock them up with the VSL and then all the VSL demos and mock them up with the SSO.


About two years ago I became enamored with Alexander Schiborr's tracks, including one called "Polychordal Deep Space" wherein he shared the track as he developed it as a case study on Redbanned, and ultimately, with me, the MIDI file (he's generous that way). The track doesn't seem to be on SoundCloud any more (due to their recent size restrictions perhaps), but anyway can be found here:





__





Alexander Schiborr at RadioSparx


Explore the Music and Sounds from Alexander Schiborr




www.radiosparx.com





.. and other places if you Google it. I mention this because I laboriously created a Sibelius score for Polychordal for my own study and edification, and drove an entire-VSL template directly from Sibelius (thru VEP; I owned no Spitfire at the time, just VSL Special Edition). Alexander's original implementation was entirely Spitfire SSO/Percussion ... and indeed the piece is more of a Spitfire-type piece per the discussion in this thread. I thought ultimately that the VSL rendition sounded decently convincing ... and I did absolutely zero tweaking on it. I did situate the instruments in MIR.

If anyone is interested in A-B'ing the Spitfire and the VSL, let me know and I will dredge them up. Since I have the MIDI, I know the notes are virtually identical, and Alexander hewed pretty closely to standard orchestral practice wrt. his MIDI tracks.


----------



## Zero&One (Jan 8, 2020)

AndyP said:


> Why not be allowed to find both good?



There has to be a winner. Just seems to be the way.



Sarah Mancuso said:


> BBCSO might not be the perfect choice either, but I've yet to hear a VSL demo that sounds like a recording instead of like a bunch of mono close-mic midi tracks panned around with bad reverb.



Listen to the first few... not bad. Eine kleine Nachtmusik by Beat is worthy of a listen. Maybe a bit dull and lifeless but he's got promise.





__





CHAMBER STRINGS I - Vienna Symphonic Library


Vienna's Chamber Strings I exude their flair for intimate arrangements in chamber music compositions or in divided string groups. Large string ensembles combined with the Chamber Strings I are enhanced by additional nuances and a wealth of variations.




www.vsl.co.at


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jan 8, 2020)

BlackDorito said:


> If anyone is interested in A-B'ing the Spitfire and the VSL, let me know and I will dredge them up. Since I have the MIDI, I know the notes are virtually identical, and Alexander hewed pretty closely to standard orchestral practice wrt. his MIDI tracks.



The problem is, you can't simply use an identical MIDI file for different libraries. Each one responds differently to MIDI data and needs to be programmed specifically for a specific library. Otherwise, one (or more) comparisons will inevitable sound weak.


----------



## Sarah Mancuso (Jan 8, 2020)

Zero&One said:


> Listen to the first few... not bad. Eine kleine Nachtmusik by Beat is worthy of a listen. Maybe a bit dull and lifeless but he's got promise.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


To be honest, this sounds worse than I remembered when I made my post above. In addition to the lack of any sense of space, the performances all sound very flat and robotic to me. Most libraries would probably struggle with that Mozart piece, but all the other VSL demos I've heard (on the linked page and elsewhere) feel similarly cheap and artificial to my ears.


----------



## Zero&One (Jan 8, 2020)

Sarah Mancuso said:


> To be honest, this sounds worse than I remembered when I made my post above. In addition to the lack of any sense of space, the performances all sound very flat and robotic to me. Most libraries would probably struggle with that Mozart piece, but all the other VSL demos I've heard (on the linked page and elsewhere) feel similarly cheap and artificial to my ears.



Cheap... ok. That's me out before I say something ridiculous also.
Bye! (leaves comedy section)


----------



## BlackDorito (Jan 8, 2020)

Wolfie2112 said:


> The problem is, you can't simply use an identical MIDI file for different libraries. Each one responds differently to MIDI data and needs to be programmed specifically for a specific library. Otherwise, one (or more) comparisons will inevitable sound weak.


I should have been more specific - I used Alexander's MIDI file to insure that the notes I was transcribing into Sibelius were the same pitches/durations as he had used originally. The MIDI stream being sent over to VEP/VSL from Sibelius was entirely a different MIDI stream. I think anyone who perceived the VSL rendering as more 'sterile' could justifiably argue that I should tweak it to improve its 'filmic' qualities. (And indeed I'm not saying the results are identical). However, I am simply suggesting this is a counterexample - i.e. VSL doesn't do too bad as a simple rendition within Sibelius. Partially I suppose this is because there is a lot of musical activity in the piece and it doesn't just linger on long gorgeous sounds - so this sort of comparison is material-dependent. I should go listen to the difference myself a bit more before I wax on any further.


----------



## CT (Jan 8, 2020)

Just want to further point out that "lifeless" and "sterile" does not, to me, mean "not cinematic." I've heard as much lively classical playing as I've heard boring cinematic playing. It's not a stylistic thing, it's just about an innate musicality and feeling of intent.


----------



## markleake (Jan 8, 2020)

miket said:


> It's not a stylistic thing, it's just about an innate musicality and feeling of intent.


Exactly, yes. VSL has always sounded very neutral to me. Having personally tasted a few of their libs now, that is very much how I'm finding them. They take more work to sound musical.

I think this is a lot of what people pick up on when they complain about the VSL sound. They have a legacy feel to them in that regard, which some of their competitors have done better at overcoming.

That said, they do have some very nice instruments. I really do like their woodwinds.


----------



## CT (Jan 8, 2020)

The woodwinds and some of the percussion/keyboards are nice, yes!


----------



## markleake (Jan 8, 2020)

Off topic, but may be relevant... I was watching the new Frankenstein series on Netflix the other day. There's some good subtle moments in there with the music. Some of it sounds like the Albions, with Albion 1 and 2 (maybe 3 also?) getting a bit of a workout.

I don't think I'd use BBCSO for this kind of underscore stuff much (I say this without having the library), and I certainly wouldn't reach for my VSL stuff first for this either. I can totally understand why the composers went with something like the Albions. Sure, they used other stuff also, but sometimes it was the Albions doing the heavy lifting.

I played along a bit with my own Albions. The big thing I noticed is they sound production ready out of the box, with no tweaking... nothing. To me, it's all about being able to trust the libraries you work with to produce good results without much effort. I often find myself going back to my Albions for this kind of thing... these libraries can outgun the best stuff out there. They have such a natural musicality to them, and the tone is excellent.

Anywho... my point is that the VSL vs. BBCSO / Spitfire fight is a bit silly when mostly all you really need are some basic ensemble libraries that are well recorded and play very musically.

It's ironic that we argue over all this stuff.


----------



## Pixelpoet1985 (Jan 8, 2020)

Sarah Mancuso said:


> BBCSO might not be the perfect choice either, but I've yet to hear a VSL demo that sounds like a recording instead of like a bunch of mono close-mic midi tracks panned around with bad reverb.


It will never stop! Sad... you guys have no clue. VSL is not mono and too close. Stop talking about things you don‘t understand. As I said, these are recordings in a small scoring stage, it‘s more like a mid microphone without a long tail. This is actual a normal engineering approach you‘re not accustomed to.

Again you‘re talking about the room. No one talks about playability. Disappointing really. Go for your preferred stuff, it will never have VSL quality. You can‘t and maybe don‘t want to appreciate this, because you haven‘t invested much time yet.


----------



## Pixelpoet1985 (Jan 8, 2020)

I mean, you guys love the woodwinds. The same is true for the others, they can sound exactly as good as the woodwinds. 

Of course, there are old demos on the VSL page that I hate. Take a look at the dimension series. This is another level. These libraries can achieve complex orchestrations and divisi no other library can.


----------



## Pixelpoet1985 (Jan 9, 2020)

@miket

Ridiculous, really.


----------



## Pixelpoet1985 (Jan 9, 2020)

Zero&One said:


> There has to be a winner. Just seems to be the way.




There hasn't to be a winner, really.

I totally like the Spitfire room sound, no question, but not the playability and quality. It's also again the dry vs wet discussion.

I only want to clarify that VSL is an awesome library that should be considered buying. Because of these "hate" here all the love is for Spitfire and others, and is this simply unfair.


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Jan 9, 2020)

Pixelpoet1985 said:


> Take a look at the dimension series. This is another level. These libraries can achieve complex orchestrations and divisi no other library can.



Well people will have all kinds of perspectives and expectations, so who knows what plays into the individual perception of things. VSL also has a ton of products spanning two decades now, so I can imagine that some might sound better or worse to one's ears.

But whoever thinks that Dimension isn't absolute top league is out of their mind and shouldn't talk about samples, ever.


----------



## Zero&One (Jan 9, 2020)

@Pixelpoet1985 
I agree.
But there's no point in discussing it to be perfectly honest on vi-c, unless you like sticking pins in your eyes or something similar.


----------



## Salorom (Jan 9, 2020)

Jimmy Hellfire said:


> But whoever thinks that Dimension isn't absolute top league is out of their mind and shouldn't talk about samples, ever.


In a nutshell, first is the Dimension series, then comes the top league.


----------



## Pedro Camacho (Jan 9, 2020)

paulthomson said:


> Hey Blessed Fountain.
> 
> just for balance for the OP. There is no “myriad of problems” and the software does run well for 99% of the user base.
> 
> ...



@paulthomson
I want to say to everyone the following:
- I own all Spitfire libraries and I love them. They are extremely good imo and, used in conjunction with other last gen libraries from other devs you can create some really incredible mockups.
- @ProjectSAM , _Maarten Spruijt, _once wrote (in 2010?): "Don't force samples to do stuff they were not designed to do". This is the single most important lesson for mockups I ever read in my life, thank you Maarten, that is also why I own all Project SAM's libraries and they are incredible.
- With that said, Spiftire stuff really allows you to cover a LOT of stuff. I don't have a single cue with orchestra that SF isn't part of it, since this company appeared.
- There only a few other devs I would say the same... @OrchestralTools is one, that is why I also own all their libraries and love each one of them in their own way.
- I have zero issues wih the Spitfire Player, just like with the new Sine player. They both just work (so far).
- I think Kontakt, however, uses much less RAM and never failed me once in the last 6 years, I don't use either Sine or SF player long enough to tell you this, but they never crashed... yet!
- 95% of my gigantic orchestral template is in Kontakt.
- The only remark I have to say is that I think Spitfire Player should have multi channel capabilities like Sine and Kontakt does, it works better on a PC. The fact JXL works on PCs and Sine is multichannel and SF is single channel because their owners work on mac is probably the reason why each one ended up like this.

Rules on the VSL vs BBC orchestra:
I own 3 private orchestral libraries I did for myself on strings, all scripted by the best in the world (imo): @Jasper Blunk .
1- never compare number of samples... use your ears and judge. Most realism comes from great recordings (great performances), great editing (this is magic...) and great scripting (only a few in the world do this well... like @Jasper Blunk)
2- never think about second hand selling: If the library is great you will use it forever, believe me.
3- compare MUSIC demos not spec sheets.
4- multi-mic recordings in a great hall/room is essential to get a great mockup. No matter how good your reverb is (I own a hardware Bricasti M7 reverb unit and, even with it) you can't make bad room recordings sound any good.
5- VSL philosophy is dry recordings, this philosophy made sense back then when RAM was small. Nowadays, with much more RAM available, multimic has proven to work MUCH better (no matter how good you are at recreating rooms with reverb). I would recommend VIENNA to create new libraries that use their wonderful syncron stage with actual REAL multimic recordings of their strings, then brass then woodwinds, in situ.
6- with the new Macs coming out with even more than 128Gbs, I think it makes even more sense to have multimic libraries that let you mix on the fly.

I hope this helps!


----------



## ptram (Jan 9, 2020)

Pedro Camacho said:


> dry recordings, this philosophy made sense back then when RAM was small.


Dry recording also make sense if you don't need a single ambience. For example, I often need my instruments to be set in a church or a small room, and dry samples can be placed wherever you want with a good spatialization software.

The alternative is to have a different library for each ambient. In my view, this will end up being more expensive and less flexible.

Dry also means that you can easily mix and match samples. Mixing together VSL Silent Stage, SFA Studio or LCO Strings, Xsample or Chris Hein, is easy thanks to their lack of predominant baked-in reverb.

Paolo


----------



## markleake (Jan 9, 2020)

Pedro Camacho said:


> I hope this helps!


Certainly does. Thanks Pedro, nicely explained!

One thing I would add to this is that VSL's dry approach (before Synchron) works better for softer instruments that excite the room less. That's why their dry woodwinds work better this way than, for example, their dry brass.



ptram said:


> The alternative is to have a different library for each ambient. In my view, this will end up being more expensive and less flexible.


But the point is the various microphones help a lot to shape the sound to taste. I think Spitfire and OT have demonstrated this very well with their recent releases. It produces results that are flexible (within reason) AND sound a fair bit more natural than you can achieve with adding reverb/room tone.

Remember also that these natural room tones are sought after for a reason. To recreate them yourself isn't the same. It makes a lot of sense for people to invest in the libs that have this already.


----------



## gamma-ut (Jan 9, 2020)

markleake said:


> One thing I would add to this is that VSL's dry approach (before Synchron) works better for softer instruments that excite the room less. That's why their dry woodwinds work better this way than, for example, their dry brass.



That suggests the key problem is less to do with the reverb tails, where it's often easy to focus, but more on the early reflections which are going to be crucial to anything that has a fairly sharp or percussive attack.

Now, it makes perfect sense that a lot of people will apply the Bones McCoy-style maxim "I'm a composer godmammit Jim not a physicist" and opt for multimic recordings and simply mix in the room and its earlies in a way that sounds pleasing or go straight to MIR in VSL. Others want the control that a dry approach offers. It's worth noting that in pop/rock mixing, engineers now tend to use a mix of reverbs to push sounds forward and back. These are techniques that can work well in a hybrid scenario though they are going to be less natural in a pure mockup situation – but they are scenarios where dry sources are easier to work with though you there will also be situations where you use the Visconti "Heroes" reverb trick of mixing mics at different distances with a multimic library.

But one thing you can't do convincingly with a wet library is to add early reflections after the fact.


----------



## markleake (Jan 9, 2020)

@gamma-ut. Wouldn't the various mics come into the picture here? That's kind of the point... they have close mics if that is what you need to use.

Also, I don't think anyone here is saying there _isn't_ any reason to have/use dry libraries. Just that there is less reason/need nowdays, and some good reasons to use libs sampled with other approaches.


----------



## ism (Jan 9, 2020)

gamma-ut said:


> Now, it makes perfect sense that a lot of people will apply the Bones McCoy-style maxim "I'm a composer godmammit Jim not a physicist"




I'm actually a much better physicist that a composer, and I still can't cope with making dry libraries sound good.

And its not just VSL. Emotional Violin, which is an amazing instrument on so many levels (and which I really do like), just isn't trying to be classical, and certain not "sterile". But it's sound just has a lack of ... something. By contrast the spitfire solo strings use crossfading techniques that vastly reduce the expressiveness and give all kinds of easily identifiable artifacts of the underlying sampling technique if you attempt to do half the expressive stuff that VSL solo strings or Emotional Vl/Vc can do.


On a technical level, I think that to get the sheer range and precision of seamless expressiveness of the likes of VSL (solo strings in particular) and Emotional Vl/Vc you simply need dry samples. Ambience and multiple mics clearly add huge technical challenges.




gamma-ut said:


> But one thing you can't do convincingly with a wet library is to add early reflections after the fact.



And this, I think, is where the physics gets really, really complicated. The equations of a string wobbling to produce sound is one thing. The equations of the all the infinite dimensions (assuming pre-quantum physics) of resonance are another think entirely.

But I actually think that the complexity isn't even necessarily so much in the physics as in the layers of perception and cognition.


As I've written elsewhere, while there's a noticeable bumpiness that's endemic to the crossfade techniques of Spitfire solo strings (when exposed), I don't feel this breaks the musicality of the sound on a felt, *emotional* level. Wheres with the VSL solo cello, one moment its the pristinely beautiful sampled solo cello I've ever heard, then next it falls off a cliff into ... something ... and the illusion is broken. I've been calling this falling off a cliff into "synthiness". But I'm not really sure that's what it is.

Evolutionary psychology might also have something to say here. At the usual risk of the kinds of too-convenient "just-so stories" that evolutional "explanations" are riddled with, it entirely plausible that our ability to spatially perceive sound arises as a survival mechanism: ie "crying child at 2:00; charging elephant at 6:00; quietly growling sabertooth tiger at 11". ie. we come from the kinds of environments where ability to perceive sound as distinct streams would have brought evolutionary advantage.


In this sense, the ability to perceive the distinct perceptual streams in, say, a nice Bach choral, is an epiphenomenal accident of our (evolved) sabertooth tiger awareness mechanisms.

And not just our capacity perceive counterpoint (ie multiple independent perceptual streams), but it also offers an explanation for the *pleasure* that rewards the cognitive work of parsing this perception out of a single sound source. So this capacity for enjoying a nice Bach choral is also an api-phenomenon of the evolutionary sabertooth tiger mechanism. Which is to say that sabertooth tigers are why Bach sounds so great. Or at least, without sabertooth tiger, there's no Bach.


So generalizing this a bit (and speculating a bit wildly) I wonder if the ability to parse spatiality in a single perceptual stream (ie just the cellos) evokes a similarly evolved mechanism as the ability to parse sound into mutiple perceptual streams.


If one is partial to the psychoanalyst of, say Juile Kristeva, and her work on language and the embodiment of the speaking subject, them maybe there's an analogous argument.


That is, the pleasure of parsing and perceiving the spatiality of the cello recorded in AIR is epiphenomenal, in the same way that the pleasure of a Bach choral is epiphenomenal.


But where the epiphenomenal nature of counterpoint is easily enough explained via safer toothtigers, this perceptual dimension I think is a bit more complicated.


And ok, the only point I wanted to make here is to agree that short reflections are really, really important, and that I think its possible that there's a perceptual dimension to it.


But since I'm speculating wildly, here a conjecture: Maybe the pleasure of perceiving spatiality in a single perceptual stream is an epiphenomenon arising from the evolutionary *social* psychology? Maybe its our experience of other as embodied speaking subjects that creates this us this capacity for such intense sensitivity to the spatial information of this embodiment, as contained in the short reflections.


Anyway, my point is just that I think short reflections are immensely important, and important at a perceptual level that I suspect runs extremely deep.


For instance, once corollary of this kind of understanding of the importance of short reflections is that it might explain a certain uncanniness in simulated short reflections.

And I really think that its not that VSL samples are "sterile" or "dead" or lack reverb. But some of us are just tweaked but the uncanniness of simulated short reflections, while others focus on other dimensions of the musicality.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jan 9, 2020)

Pedro Camacho said:


> 1- never compare number of samples... use your ears and judge. Most realism comes from great recordings (great performances), great editing (this is magic...) and great scripting



This!



Pedro Camacho said:


> 3- compare MUSIC demos not spec sheets.



And this! I can't recall how many times I've read demands for more dynamic layers, more flux capacitors, blah blah blah. I think the problem is we're spoiled in this day and age and take things for granted; we would have given our left nut for this technology 20 years ago. If a library sounds like what you're after, then get it. Don't worry so much about what's "under the hood".


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Jan 9, 2020)

These discussions always end up running in circles, but I feel that one aspect always gets overlooked.

It's a sign of the times that so much focus lies on the sound alone. This is analogous to the general tendency of music today to be less about musical content such as part writing, melody, harmony, phrasing etc. and more about sonics and/or sound design. This is not only evident in today's film music, but even more so in pop, and also in music genres where instruments are still played (for example rock, where the focus has shifted a whole lot towards the right signal chain as opposed to phrasing and delivery). 

Similarly, when it comes to producing a plausible approximation of an orchestral performance with samples, the focus now seems to be exclusively on the sonics. For my standards, this is a somewhat simplistic and one-sided way of looking at things.

Of course there is a valid discussion regarding a natural, recorded ambience vs. artificial reverb, and surely the natural ambience will most of the time result in a more plausible sounding representation of a space. Although I think that the differences are often far less significant than they are frequently made out to be, and it also very much depends on the instrument and register, as well as the desired ambient image.

But what does really constitute a plausible or realistic sounding production? Ideally the space sounds like a real space, the instruments sound like real instruments and the performance sounds as if it was real humans playing the music. But for some reason, all we seem to be talking about now is the space. That brings me back to the original sentiment about the significance of sonics in today's perception of music.

So to me it seems that many people today are just concerned about their samples sounding like recorded music "out of the box" and place their entire hope in this one quality to make their tracks sound good - while simply trusting that the recorded articulations will hopefully contain the expression and "emotion" they seek for their music.

Which is OK, and I even believe that in many cases, a library with great sounding cohesive ambience will serve this purpose perfectly well and probably better than a dry one. But then again, this will also depend on the complexity of the music.

It's still very true that dry vs. wet is a trade-off in the sense of sound vs. agility and programmability of samples. This is where the other aspect of "realism" comes into play: a musical sounding performance of the parts. The ambience can sound as real as it gets, if I just can't get the performance to sound somewhat plausible, it doesn't help much. And wet libraries are STILL often problematic in this regard - partly because of the traditional drawbacks of the sampling method, and partly because the developers don't place enough value in dynamic range, wealth of articulations, scripting etc.

This is one reason why people still don't want to miss their Dimension libraries for example - because the dynamic depth, agility and flexibility of the samples just simply still is way ahead of the popular ambient libraries. It's fine if you're doing stuff where you don't have to really rely on these qualities, but disregarding them completely, even making blanket statements and generalizations like "ambient multi-mic is a must and dry(ish) libraries are archaic" is rather short-sighted and wrong.

I personally feel that I still need several different libraries to try and halfway get where I want. The magic bullet still hasn't been invented, and so I still rely on both dry and wet.


----------



## BlackDorito (Jan 9, 2020)

This has been a good thread, even though it rehashes a well-worn topic.

Below are a few things that particularly struck me either technically or otherwise, in no particular order. I won't mention that practically everything below is hotly disputed by some. This thread is a virtual microcosm of many topic areas on VI-C.

Needless to say, the biggest thing I learned was that _we would have no Bach if it were not for saber-tooth tigers_. This was never covered in my "History of Western Music" textbook so many years ago, but I will carry it forward in all my life activities hereafter.


people have strong opinions about VSL's library approach which can manifest itself as intolerance for other opinions
if you want to bicker, buy a goldfish
I'm not subjective at all ... I don't regret my VSL purchases, but I regret the time and money I wasted on other libraries.
Composers and musicians will notice the difference in the sound of all of these libraries much more so than any director or producer or moviegoer.
the age and limitations of VSL should result in lower prices for The Cube. Counter: good recordings never get old.
VSL's dongle policy is reviled by most, but it allows them to effectively offer a 30-day trial period
VSL sounds more classical but can be used for anything. Counter: VSL lacks the warmth, dimension, and depth of realism and tone that newer libraries offer.
high-classical works that call for great and virtuosic precision are probably going to sound much, much better on VSL that on SSO
Guy Bacos has expressive demos for VSL
BBC and VSL are different animals
VSL woodwinds and Synchron Perc are wonderful. Dimension strings/brass are in a league of their own. Synchron pianos are excellent.
VI Pro is more robust, stable and solid than the Spitfire player right now [Wait .. no it isn't] However, the Synchron player has multiple problems
VSL playability, especially with the Synchron player surpasses the others.
with VSL, you need to 'write to the samples' the least.
VSL sounds nice with individual instruments but I find it suffers from the "organ" effect when layering a lot of the instruments together. I use it only with other libraries to augment. The winds are still lovely and I think their legatos are second to none.
VSL is more deeply sampled that many libraries and contains more articulation choices (more so the full VI libraries than the Special Edition)
Berlin and Spitfire are great out-of-the-box, but the scripting isn't good and will never be at the same level as VSL. The VI (Pro) player is better than Kontakt and even Spitfire's and OT's new player. They now have features which VSL had years ago.
don't compare libraries by sample count or dynamic layers, use your ears. "if it sounds good, then it's good"
Libraries X, Y and Z are more modern than VSL. VSL scripting is old.
VSL samples/instruments are higher quality; if you listen carefully, you will notice that VSL comes much closer to the natural sound than most of its competitors!
Is is fair to call VSL samples "neutral", "lifeless", "sterile" ?
the Cube is recorded in a small fairly reflective space (the 'silent stage'), to which other early reflections and tails can be added to try to give the impression of a hall. Once the hall is added thought, all of those baked-in early reflections from the original recording space are still there and even amplified through the above process. However, The Silent Stage is NOT an anechoic chamber or something like that, and there actually are early reflections in the recordings. It's "just" super-dry, but certainly not without early reflections.
I purchased MIR Pro and started moving the 2nd microphone (in my case Teldex) to the back of the room (using VSL samples), adjusting its DB’s and changing out the different microphone options and......wow! What a difference and as an added plus my Berlin series samples now worked in the same room as my VSL samples.
Adding verb to VSL definitely helps but regardless of what kind of verb or how much you add VSL still sounds thinner, less lush, more lifeless, less real, less warm, less natural and less vivid than Spitfire and OT libraries.
With MIR Pro I can achieve very good and real results, similar to Teldex or Sony.
Dry recording also make sense if you don't need a single ambience. For example, I often need my instruments to be set in a church or a small room, and dry samples can be placed wherever you want with a good spatialization software.
VSL's dry approach (before Synchron) works better for softer instruments that excite the room less. That's why their dry woodwinds work better this way than, for example, their dry brass.
to get the sheer range and precision of seamless expressiveness of the likes of VSL (solo strings in particular) and Emotional Vl/Vc you simply need dry samples. Ambience and multiple mics clearly add huge technical challenges.
there's a noticeable bumpiness that's endemic to the crossfade techniques of Spitfire solo strings (when exposed), I don't feel this breaks the musicality of the sound on a felt, *emotional* level. Wheres with the VSL solo cello, one moment its the pristinely beautiful sampled solo cello I've ever heard, then next it falls off a cliff into ... something ... and the illusion is broken. I've been calling this falling off a cliff into "synthiness". But I'm not really sure that's what it is.
dry vs. wet is a trade-off in the sense of sound vs. agility and programmability of samples.


----------



## markleake (Jan 9, 2020)

A good summary @BlackDorito. Some of the statements when summarised like this seem a little, er, extreme or black/white. But yes, overall, your list highlights there is no simple answer to the original question. Or at least that composers are passionate about how their music sounds and the tools they use.

I think in future if anyone complains that VSL doesn't get a good hearing around here, we can point them to this thread. It's refreshing to see an in-depth discussion like this not get _too_ derailed.


----------



## madfloyd (Jan 10, 2020)

A lot of those points seem to contradict each other. Perhaps I'm not reading them in the right context?

But what I really want to know is how the saber tooth tiger is responsible for Bach.


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Jan 10, 2020)

madfloyd said:


> A lot of those points seem to contradict each other.



It's complicated.


----------



## Fleer (Jan 10, 2020)

For me, as a classically trained musician and writer, Beethoven is OK, Vivaldi is fine, Schubert is nice, Mozart is lovely, but only Bach is divine, and BBCSO takes me there.


----------



## holywilly (Jan 10, 2020)

VSL Strings might not be the best sounding library, to me VSL Strings are the best library as the writing tool because of the versatility and playability. 

I write with VSL, then copy the midi to BBC Strings and re-program the CC, layer them together yields beautiful result.


----------



## Dear Villain (Jan 11, 2020)

It has been fascinating to see the widely varied opinions about VSL's offerings. I believe that everyone is justified in their own personal opinions, especially when you consider how musical tastes/styles/backgrounds are unique to the individual. What really surprises me personally, is how, if I spend enough time reading other people's views, it can start to make me question my own tastes/preferences to the point of feeling like I no longer have any clue about what I'm doing. I've always been pleased with VSL's offerings and they are the only libraries I've worked with. However, I notice that when I start going down the rabbit hole of researching alternatives to VSL, I always am left feeling overwhelmed, confused, and/or insecure about my own abilities. Reading people saying stuff like, "I've only heard 2 composers that have done good work with VSL", when I've heard literally dozens upon dozens that have, makes me wonder if I'm completely out to lunch.

I think the best solution to avoiding the guilt/inferiority complex that comes with using tools that many other people don't like, is to simply ignore the noise, double down on what you believe works for you, and just keep creating. I'm at my happiest when I'm in the studio writing...however, every time I have a lull in creative inspiration and start "researching", I end up feeling less good about my past work simply because it seems like so few people appreciate the very tools I'm most comfortable working with. Anyway, I'm sure in a moment of weakness, I'll be back to asking about new library offerings/wondering what's better than VSL...in the meantime, I'll make use of my antiquated Symphonic Cube and be happy that it allows me to realize fairly convincing mock-ups of music that may/may not be better than what I could achieve with another company's products. Plus, I'll save a boatload of funds too...win/win 

Dave


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Jan 11, 2020)

Dear Villain said:


> Reading people saying stuff like, "I've only heard 2 composers that have done good work with VSL", when I've heard literally dozens upon dozens that have, makes me wonder if I'm completely out to lunch.



Specifically those people I firmly believe are talking out of their you know what.


----------



## ism (Jan 11, 2020)

holywilly said:


> VSL Strings might not be the best sounding library, to me VSL Strings are the best library as the writing tool because of the versatility and playability.
> 
> I write with VSL, then copy the midi to BBC Strings and re-program the CC, layer them together yields beautiful result.



That's an interesting way to frame it.


One of the issues I've had with a library like Tundra is that the sheer sound is so gorgeous in its own right that its trivial to write endless amount of absolutely gorgeous ambient mush. Nothing that a even moderately talented cat couldn't writing by strolling across a keyboard if you were to leave it by a window on a sufficiently sunny afternoon.


Wheres back when I used to work with the VSL SE - with neither an adequate reverb nor the skill to mix it properly - it was the opposite end of the spectrum. You can't just let a note hand in the air and invite the listener to just kind of take in how gorgeous the sound is.

You have the get the musicality working at the level of harmony and rhythm and counterpoint to create a musicality with any chance of being listenable.


Obviously VSL (with MIR and an modicum of competence in mixing) can sound better far better the way I could make, and Tundra even better with actual harmony and counterpoint. So it's entirely a false dichotomy. 

But I also think that some of the exciting ways that the genres of film and classical and electronic and popular and neo-classical (whatever that is) music are influencing and bleeding into and expanding each other at the moment lines are finding ways to synthesize these two ends of the spectrum, revealing the falsity of the dichotomy.


----------



## ism (Jan 11, 2020)

madfloyd said:


> A lot of those points seem to contradict each other. Perhaps I'm not reading them in the right context?
> 
> But what I really want to know is how the saber tooth tiger is responsible for Bach.



I think that the interesting and significant thing about this thread is precisely these seemingly contradictory perceptions.

Granting that that we need to take each other's perceptions of musicality and samples in good faith (ie not resorting to dismissing each other's perceptions as "fanboyism" etc), they we see clearly here that musicality has these immensely rich dimensions of perception - that is beyond mere subjective personal taste.

David Huron's book gives a musicological account specifically of the perceptual dimension of voice leading (and its origins in sabertooth tigers)



By not only arguing basically the "Bach was right about everything all along" thesis (which is something that I've sure we can all agree on in any event), but by rigorously demonstrating, via empirical musicology, that all the modern science of sound perception really just confirms that Bach was right about everything all along.

(I added the specific sabertooth tiger example to his argument myself, but only for clarity).


----------



## Michael Antrum (Jan 11, 2020)

Bach was absolutely not right about everything all along. 

You are confusing him with my wife....


----------



## Fleer (Jan 11, 2020)

Parodieverfahren rules.


----------



## ism (Jan 11, 2020)

Michael Antrum said:


> Bach was absolutely not right about everything all along.
> 
> You are confusing him with my wife....



Well maybe not everything. Except in voice leading. He was right about everything in voice leading. 

(Huron's books make that a remarkably precise scientifically claim).


----------



## Fleer (Jan 11, 2020)

And counterpoint. Punctus contra punctum. He was the god of counterpoint.


----------



## Zero&One (Jan 11, 2020)

Dear Villain said:


> owever, I notice that when I start going down the rabbit hole of researching alternatives to VSL, I always am left feeling overwhelmed, confused, and/or insecure about my own abilities.



Your stuff is one of the main reasons I got into VSL. Always top class, always a good listen and I learn something from them every time. Class act.
Those comments are the reason I left this thread. I expected more, not from their dull uninspiring music, but as a fellow musician.


----------



## Dear Villain (Jan 11, 2020)

Zero&One said:


> Your stuff is one of the main reasons I got into VSL. Always top class, always a good listen and I learn something from them every time. Class act.
> Those comments are the reason I left this thread. I expected more, not from their dull uninspiring music, but as a fellow musician.



Thank you so much for your kind words. This is one of the nicest things I've read and encourages me to keep doing what I'm doing. I hope you are enjoying your experiences using VSL as well.

Cheers!
Dave


----------



## CT (Jan 11, 2020)

Zero&One said:


> Your stuff is one of the main reasons I got into VSL. Always top class, always a good listen and I learn something from them every time. Class act.
> Those comments are the reason I left this thread. I expected more, not from their dull uninspiring music, but as a fellow musician.



Am I one of those dull and uninspiring composers that more was expected from? So the fact that I find the VSL sound off-putting (as opposed to the spirit of the composers using it) and have only been convinced by it on rare occasions means that I'm fair game for that kind of nasty assessment? That's rather revolting, if so.


----------



## gamma-ut (Jan 11, 2020)

A certain Carly Simon song springs to mind for some reason.


----------



## CT (Jan 11, 2020)

Dear Villain said:


> Reading people saying stuff like, "I've only heard 2 composers that have done good work with VSL", when I've heard literally dozens upon dozens that have, makes me wonder if I'm completely out to lunch.



Hello Dear Villain.

I certainly hope that my lack of enthusiasm for the VSL sound would not have any impact on your own confidence in its continued use, unless you found that it led you to feel differently yourself. We can only go by what our own ears tell us.

I would also like to draw attention to the fact that, while I never said anything about the fundamental quality of the music itself that others have done with VSL, nor the character of those people, yours included, some others in this thread felt the need to make the discussion about that, or about "talking out of one's ass." I see by your "likes" that you seem to endorse this kind of attitude, but I implore you to reconsider the net value to the human endeavour of such crass personal escalations of differences in opinion.


----------



## Zero&One (Jan 11, 2020)

miket said:


> Am I one of those dull and uninspiring composers that more was expected from?



Did I mention names? No. 
I purposely avoided that.

By the way you are responding, it seems others can't have a opinion on something if it doesn't line up with yours either.
Can I not find something dull and uninspiring?

You see, this type of thread (the way it turned) causes nothing but negativity and self doubt. Fine when it's not yourself feeling it, but when it is... then people get upset.


----------



## MarcHedenberg (Jan 11, 2020)

Michael Antrum said:


> Bach was absolutely not right about everything all along.
> 
> You are confusing him with my wife....



Underrated comment.


----------



## Dear Villain (Jan 11, 2020)

miket said:


> Hello Dear Villain.
> 
> I certainly hope that my lack of enthusiasm for the VSL sound would not have any impact on your own confidence in its continued use, unless you found that it led you to feel differently yourself. We can only go by what our own ears tell us.
> 
> I would also like to draw attention to the fact that, while I never said anything about the fundamental quality of the music itself that others have done with VSL, nor the character of those people, yours included, some others in this thread felt the need to make the discussion about that, or about "talking out of one's ass." I see by your "likes" that you seem to endorse this kind of attitude, but I implore you to reconsider the net value to the human endeavour of such crass personal escalations of differences in opinion.



Hi Mike,

Thank you for your clarification. I apologize if you felt my "like" of Jimmy Hellfire's post was in some way an attack on your right to like what you like. In general, I've found so many of Jimmy's posts highly informative and I appreciate his views on a lot of issues. That's all that was...of course, it did make me feel better on a personal level to know that others believe there are more than simply a couple of composers making good use of VSL.

I also understand that your comments are specific to the quality/aesthetics of the libraries in question, not the competence of the composers. Thanks for taking the time to clarify your own point of view. I listened to some of your work and can completely understand how the VSL sound might not work for you. You've done great work and I wish you continued success!

Cheers,
Dave


----------



## Michael Antrum (Jan 11, 2020)

On a related note, I am a bit of a recent VSL convert. Another member posted this on another area of the forum, using VSL's 'old' libraries. I think it's rather good....



Thread below....





__





Vivaldi - Summer - Presto --- Vienna Special Edition VOL 1 and 1 PLUS


Hi everyone A mockup for this well-known piece. Software I have used: Cubase - Especial Edition VOL 1 & 1 PLUS - Vienna instrument Pro - Virtualsoundstage - Valhalla room reverb I accompanied it with a video to make it more enjoyable. Feedback, criticism and opinions are welcome Greetings




vi-control.net


----------



## Alex Fraser (Jan 11, 2020)

I’ve heard compositions from both Dave and Mike - each using opposing libraries in the dry/wet debate. 

And both guys make great music. Dry, wet, whatever.


----------



## Geoff (Mar 31, 2020)

New here as looking to buy a VI package and was very interested in the current big VSL discounts that expire on April 2nd. I was looking at the full Cube.

Read though all this thread which was interesting and informative though not sure I am much further forward! It did introduce me to the intriguing BBCSO though which I was warming to.

One thing that got mentioned only once though was notation software - it is very important to me as using notation software is how I work i.e. Sibelius. VSL has dedicated soundsets whereas the BBCSO does not and though there are ways round this with dedicated commands this is a bit of game changer for me as I really don't want to go down that road and spend many hours just trying to get articulations (and dynamics?) to work. Have I got this right?


----------



## Michael Antrum (Mar 31, 2020)

I‘ve recently switch to doing my notation in Staffpad on an iPad, but before that I was using Noteperformer in Dorico for scoring, so I can’t help there. 

However My reason for posting is that there’s a guy selling a full cube in the classifieds at the moment, which could save you some money - if that’s the way you decide to go...


----------



## muk (Apr 1, 2020)

@Geoff if you plan on using the audio output of Sibelius only, BBCSO and VSL Cube both are not the right decision in my opinion. Because by far the most important factor why the audio output of a notation program does not sound good/realistic is the static playback. There is no variation in timing, nor in volume. And that sounds robotic, as no human would nor could ever play that way. Buying better sounds will not change anything about that. The sounds play a part as well of course, but the far greater obstacle is the completely lifeless playback of the notation program.

So if you buy BBCSO or VSL Cube, you'd end up having invested around 1000$, and get only marginally better playback from Sibelius.

Instead, I would advise to look into Wallander NotePerformer:






NotePerformer 3


NotePerformer 3 is the Artificial Intelligence-based orchestral playback engine for Sibelius, Finale & Dorico.




www.noteperformer.com





Noteperformer does tackle the lifeless output, as it tries to interpret notation the way that musicians would. It's not as good as a good mockup, but it has the best playback directly from a notation program I have ever heard. And by a large margin. In my opinion, NotePerformer sounds way better than playback from Sibelius with VSL Cube. It's considerably less expensive too. There is a free trial. I would advise to try that and see if you like it before spending a large sum on a sample library.

TL;DR: my advise would be: if you do not want to work with a daw, VSL Cube and BBCSO will not benefit you much. These are great tools for creating mockups. For playback from a notation program - not so much. Instead, look into Wallander NotePerformer. It really increases the quality of notation program playback a lot. Alternatively, Staffpad could be an option if you are into creating scores on a tablet with a touchpen.


----------



## Geoff (Apr 1, 2020)

Thanks muk. Interestingly I downloaded the demo of that recently but not tried it yet so will! 

What I would say about Sibelius is if you have the correct soundsets is that it isn't as lifeless as you suggest as fine dynamic control is certainly possible as is the life brought in by detailed articulations though I get the point about variation in timing. Also the music I write tends to have fine timings built into the rhythmic notation of the score. But thanks for the tip! 

I do use a DAW as well for all sorts of stuff (Logic mainly) but because I conceive of my music in notation form, and often quite complex stuff, I struggle to see how I could do that in a DAW. A somewhat ignorant question therefore arises in my mind: how do people create complex orchestral scores in a DAW only (and presumably not just using the weak notation aspects of a DAW)?


----------



## robgb (Apr 1, 2020)

If you're writing with notation software, I'd advise printing out the music, then use it as a guide to actually play each part in your DAW. You will never get satisfying results from machine playback.


----------



## Geoff (Apr 1, 2020)

robgb said:


> If you're writing with notation software, I'd advise printing out the music, then use it as a guide to actually play each part in your DAW. You will never get satisfying results from machine playback.


Interesting. I can't see that working for the sort of stuff I write even if my keyboard skills were up to it, as the rhythmic and expressive complexity is too great. Kind of the whole point for me of scoring music using notation is that you go beyond the idea of the keyboard and one's own technical capacity and instead imagine the specialist skills of each instrumentalist and their vertical combination.


----------



## Gil (Apr 1, 2020)

Hello,
I'm also trying to use VSL Cube inside Sibelius: obviously NotePerformer (that I also own) is the easiest way and sounds terrific:

Anyway, if you're taking the time to use midi CC, articulations switch, and other things in Sibelius, you can reach this kind of result:


----------



## robgb (Apr 1, 2020)

Geoff said:


> Interesting. I can't see that working for the sort of stuff I write even if my keyboard skills were up to it, as the rhythmic and expressive complexity is too great. Kind of the whole point for me of scoring music using notation is that you go beyond the idea of the keyboard and one's own technical capacity and instead imagine the specialist skills of each instrumentalist and their vertical combination.


Unfortunately, a machine will never give you the expressiveness of real playing. Even if your keyboard skills are poor, it will be much easier to tweak that in midi rather than trying to tweak the robotic stuff notation software gives you.


----------



## ptram (Apr 1, 2020)

Geoff said:


> Interesting. I can't see that working for the sort of stuff I write even if my keyboard skills were up to it, as the rhythmic and expressive complexity is too great.


Another solution would be to switch to Dorico. Not yet a DAW, but it is already easy to make fine adjustments to playback timing, without affecting the notated score.

There are no expression maps for VSL libraries, but it is not impossible to make one's owns, once understood how they work. You create an entry, choose a playback technique, and add the messages to select the actual sound. It becomes to be more complicate with combined techniques, like n.v.+legato.

Paolo


----------



## Dewdman42 (Apr 1, 2020)

In the case of VSL, the sheer flexibility of the matrix concept makes it pretty much mandatory to just build your own expression maps. I bet no two people are setting up ViPro or Synchron with quite the same set of keyswitches in a matrix. 

These guys did a comprehensive setup where they created actual ViPro presets that follow their own consistent methodology, along with articulation sets and expression maps to match. Too pricey for me though:





__





Articulate Presets | Symphonic Riot


Articulate Presets for the Vienna Symphonic Library are complete, consistent across the entire orchestra and provide unprecedented control over your sounds.




www.articulate-preset.com


----------



## Gil (Apr 1, 2020)

Dewdman42 said:


> In the case of VSL, the sheer flexibility of the matrix concept makes it pretty much mandatory to just build your own expression maps. I bet no two people are setting up ViPro or Synchron with quite the same set of keyswitches in a matrix.
> 
> These guys did a comprehensive setup where they created actual ViPro presets that follow their own consistent methodology, along with articulation sets and expression maps to match. Too pricey for me though:
> 
> ...


Thanks, very interesting!
I wonder if they plan to update them to use with Dorico...
It seems that with today's version of Dorico (3.1) expression maps become difficult to use with VSL when trying to combine articulations.


----------



## ptram (Apr 1, 2020)

Gil said:


> It seems that with today's version of Dorico (3.1) expression maps become difficult to use with VSL when trying to combine articulations.


Non complicate per-se, but it's just that there are a lot of possible combinations, and you have to program them all.

Paolo


----------



## Gil (Apr 2, 2020)

ptram said:


> Non complicate per-se, but it's just that there are a lot of possible combinations, and you have to program them all.
> 
> Paolo


I've send them a message about Dorico, I'll let you know when I'll have an answer 
Gil


----------



## Geoff (Apr 2, 2020)

Some very interesting ideas here to try, many thanks. 

Playing stuff in is not going to be a solution for me as it would be literally impossible to get the required accuracy even with quantizing (which would take forever to get right anyway) but other things do look very useful. 

Worth saying that Sibelius already has some half-decent built in tools to avoid overly mechanical playback so it isn't true to say it will only ever sound mechanical, though the truth is _all _VI versions of normally live-performed acoustic music sound mechanical / wrong, up to a point. I guess the question is how much work one is willing to put in to mitigate that and also how many compromises one is willing to make in what one really wants to write - this is a serious issue too. There will be a trade-off between the time and effort needed and the value of the end result. Plus then the issue of, how much time all that is taking away from actually being creative and also making one think if I write that, it will sound crap mocked-up!

I guess we are very lucky to have these tools though since as Adorno said 'music which has not been heard falls into empty time like an impotent bullet'.


----------



## marco berco (Apr 3, 2020)

Ben said:


> Hi, here is not-Herb from VSL
> 
> We believe that each user should be allowed to talk about his opinion and personal experiences.
> Our libraries are great and they will work for a lot of different use-cases. There might be situations where libraries from other manufacturers will sound better. But this is the good part: You can choose which library is best for your case and nobody is stopping you from using one or the other, or even both together at the same time
> ...


I am a big fan of the Synchron Player, it is a big improvement for me from the former VI Pro which was also very good. I found it very user-friendly and stable, I work on a Ma Laptop 32 Go of RAM and VE Pro and had no issue with the products i also found very stable. I purchased quite some Synchronized Libraries before going to the new Synchron libraries, I own many OT and Spitfire Libraries too and Ben is right, no need to fight over sample libraries, all of those are very professional and sounds top notch.


----------



## Gil (Apr 4, 2020)

Dewdman42 said:


> In the case of VSL, the sheer flexibility of the matrix concept makes it pretty much mandatory to just build your own expression maps. I bet no two people are setting up ViPro or Synchron with quite the same set of keyswitches in a matrix.
> 
> These guys did a comprehensive setup where they created actual ViPro presets that follow their own consistent methodology, along with articulation sets and expression maps to match. Too pricey for me though:
> 
> ...


Hello,
I received a message from them and they do not intend to move the Expression Map to Dorico 3, because it has been a big effort to create this for Cubase and Dorico has still a rather small user base.
Let's wait for Dorico 4 to see if we can import Cubase Expression Maps with small effort.


----------



## Geoff (Apr 10, 2020)

muk said:


> @Geoff if you plan on using the audio output of Sibelius only, BBCSO and VSL Cube both are not the right decision in my opinion. Because by far the most important factor why the audio output of a notation program does not sound good/realistic is the static playback. There is no variation in timing, nor in volume. And that sounds robotic, as no human would nor could ever play that way. Buying better sounds will not change anything about that. The sounds play a part as well of course, but the far greater obstacle is the completely lifeless playback of the notation program.
> 
> So if you buy BBCSO or VSL Cube, you'd end up having invested around 1000$, and get only marginally better playback from Sibelius.
> 
> ...


I had a go with NotePerformer demo on a movement from a recent piano piece I wrote and was fairly impressed. Like most software I find the grand piano a bit too bright to my taste but the playback does seem to have quite a naturalistic quality to it though there is something about the way the chords are struck that is slightly odd at times. It is very simple to use I must say and the response to dynamics in Sibelius is very good. I will try an orchestral piece next.


----------



## node01 (Dec 2, 2020)

Gil said:


> Hello,
> I'm also trying to use VSL Cube inside Sibelius: obviously NotePerformer (that I also own) is the easiest way and sounds terrific:
> 
> Anyway, if you're taking the time to use midi CC, articulations switch, and other things in Sibelius, you can reach this kind of result:



Was this only


Pixelpoet1985 said:


> It's true, I don't know why I'm answering here ... It makes me sad when people talk this way. This was the reason why I stopped buying VSL libraries in the past. But finally, I realised that these are the best ones (for me) in terms of quality and playability. Sure, if you take the special editions this isn't a fair comparison. If you take Dimension Brass or Dimension Strings, these really are the best libraries they offer, together with the woodwinds.
> 
> I also like the raw silent stage sound. It's a very small scoring stage, so I don't understand when people say VSL doesn't blend. I think they blend perfectly together, because they are all recorded in the same room (as all the other libraries). I have other libraries (e.g. BBCSO) and I'm always coming back to VSL. With MIR Pro I can achieve very good and real results, similar to Teldex or Sony. Some day I will make a comparison video ... Because, as I said, it's so sad that people are talking about VSL this way. The only fact is they don't know how to use these libraries properly. This is the only (!) reason, in my opinion.
> 
> VSL sounds real and plays real, it's for professionals, BBCSO isn't. There are too many drawbacks: bad editing, bad scripting, few velocity layers, bad crossfading and a lack of important articulations (e.g. détaché). These "lite" performance legatos ("lite" compared to SSO) are nice to have, but don't sound real with these staccato overlays. You can't play fast legatos without triggering them. VSL has dedicated fast legato and trill patches, for example.


Do you have the BBCSO core or the pro? Do you happen to have VSL Cube also?


----------

