# Wow! Samplemodeling's Violin



## LondonMike (Dec 6, 2016)




----------



## DSmolken (Dec 6, 2016)

It makes a surprisingly good fiddle, too!


----------



## pmcrockett (Dec 6, 2016)

I was expecting the bass to be next. Downloading as soon as I finish breakfast. In terms of tone quality, they've really come a long way since viola v1.0.


----------



## byzantium (Dec 6, 2016)

He's a great player too. Lots of great products and competition out there now in the solo violin & cello market, with Chris Hein, Virharmonic Bohemian, Orchestral Tools, Harmonic Subtones, Embertone, Sample Modelling etc.


----------



## LondonMike (Dec 6, 2016)

byzantium said:


> He's a great player too. Lots of great products and competition out there now in the solo violin & cello market, with Chris Hein, Virharmonic Bohemian, Orchestral Tools, Harmonic Subtones, Embertone, Sample Modelling etc.


I bought Emotional Cello in the sales and I really hope (quietly confident) this SM violin will blend with it! Not going to purchase just yet as my wallet is still smoking!!


----------



## ProtectedRights (Dec 6, 2016)

Hm, while hard attack and soft attack sound convincing, medium attack sounds a bit artificial to me.
Pleased though about sound in general.


----------



## kevinlee87 (Dec 6, 2016)

Amazing Virtual Quartet is born! Looking forward to Double Bass!


----------



## byzantium (Dec 6, 2016)

LondonMike said:


> I bought Emotional Cello in the sales and I really hope (quietly confident) this SM violin will blend with it! Not going to purchase just yet as my wallet is still smoking!!



Hope you like the Emotional Cello, it sounds fantastic in the walkthrough video. Pricey enough at the normal price of €259 but if it was half-price in the recent sales, that would have been sweet.


----------



## LondonMike (Dec 6, 2016)

byzantium said:


> Hope you like the Emotional Cello, it sounds fantastic in the walkthrough video. Pricey enough at the normal price of €259 but if it was half-price in the recent sales, that would have been sweet.


Got it for around £135 ($163) from Big Fish Audio. Very sweet indeed! I'm getting to know it and it certainly has a nice sound!


----------



## noises on (Dec 6, 2016)

LondonMike said:


> I bought Emotional Cello in the sales and I really hope (quietly confident) this SM violin will blend with it! Not going to purchase just yet as my wallet is still smoking!!


The clever Harmonic Subtones developers know how to keep us in suspense for their Emotional Violin. I weakened and bought vir harmonics wonderfully playable bohem violin. Very excited to receive their promised updates as promised end of December. I will be very impressed when physical model strings achieve the timbral quality equivalent to the sampled options out there. As far as expression capabilities physical modelling is unsurpassed.


----------



## bvaughn0402 (Dec 6, 2016)

What is that wind controller he is using?


----------



## Parsifal666 (Dec 6, 2016)

byzantium said:


> Hope you like the Emotional Cello, it sounds fantastic in the walkthrough video. Pricey enough at the normal price of €259 but if it was half-price in the recent sales, that would have been sweet.



EC is fantastic, especially when it comes to overall sound, the best imo. Only problem I have is that there isn't much control of the vibrato, but I have to admit the baked in is seriously good. I bought it for 171 US and it was more than worth every penny.


----------



## C-Wave (Dec 6, 2016)

You had to ask  :
http://www.ilio.com/products/hornberg/hb1


----------



## LondonMike (Dec 6, 2016)

noises on said:


> The clever Harmonic Subtones developers know how to keep us in suspense for their Emotional Violin. I weakened and bought vir harmonics wonderfully playable bohem violin. Very excited to receive their promised updates as promised end of December. I will be very impressed when physical model strings achieve the timbral quality equivalent to the sampled options out there. As far as expression capabilities physical modelling is unsurpassed.


Yes there is still a trade off between playability and authenticity. I think the Samplemodeling Trumpet and Trombone are the best I've come across for bridging the gap.
As for Harmonic Subtones, I don't get who they are because they haven't had a functioning web site ever since I first heard of them- many months ago. They have such a good product but they are an enigma!


----------



## Rob Elliott (Dec 6, 2016)

The control and playability is unequaled - but something is screaming at me synthetic. It's like just the 'wrong person was used in the sampling session' (of course no sampling was done - just the way it sounds to my ears. it's missing some body me thinks) Is the control worth the timbre weakness? Maybe.


edit: perhaps something demo'd (solo) played more evocatively would show me its full range (ala Hillary Hahn, etc.). no doubt a wonderful fiddle instrument.


----------



## Baron Greuner (Dec 6, 2016)

Got to be honest folks and this is just an opinion from the safety of an armchair, there is something here that doesn't sound quite right.
It seems to me that there's a lack of body and depth to the sound. Almost a little bit 2 dimensional.


----------



## aelwyn (Dec 6, 2016)

Baron Greuner said:


> Got to be honest folks and this is just an opinion from the safety of an armchair, there is something here that doesn't sound quite right.
> It seems to me that there's a lack of body and depth to the sound. Almost a little bit 2 dimensional.



Agreed. Sound a bit like an electric violin. No resonance.


----------



## Rob Elliott (Dec 6, 2016)

I hear it too Baron. There is a demo on their site (the last 'swing' one) that takes me most of the way there. Could even be useful to mock up properly that vibe for a 'turn of the century' vibe - although might be a bit 30's French gypsy-ish. Let's just call it - short of the human voice - capturing a 'solo violin' - modelling or samples it as difficult as it gets. I SOOOOO want someone to get it.


----------



## Baron Greuner (Dec 6, 2016)

Hahahahah. It won't be me Rob. I'm still looking for a cello. I'm pretty happy with the V violin and await the next phase. Playablilty compared to the one featured here will not be as good, but you get used to playing these quirky things on a keyboard eventually.
Sound always rules IMO.


----------



## byzantium (Dec 6, 2016)

What do ye think of the Chris Hein solo violin in terms of sound and playability?


----------



## storyteller (Dec 6, 2016)

Reminds me of the Garritan Stradivari videos.... same developers though, right? I still use it from time to time, albeit with its quirks from not having been upgraded in some time. I prefer Bohemian Vioin in most compositions now - so easy to use (can't wait for portamentos... no rush there guys ). But compared to the original Garritan Stradivari, I much prefer the tone of this new violin. The original Stradivari lacked fullness in body. I'm eager to try this one out. 

Also, I know it isn't fair to compare two VIs designed nearly a decade apart. The old one has just held up surprisingly well. The cello was (and still is) much more impressive though.


----------



## Parsifal666 (Dec 6, 2016)

byzantium said:


> What do ye think of the Chris Hein solo violin in terms of sound and playability?



OUTSTANDING. You get a whole page of vibrato features, a marvelous sound out of the box...I really like the East West Gold Solo, and the Friedlander is excellent. But with the CH instruments....there just so *much* you can do with them, and the sound is amazing. I should mention, when it comes to the Violin, you might have to eq it a bit when you first open it up, but once you've navigated through the controls, read the manual, etc, you will be very happy.


----------



## Hannes_F (Dec 6, 2016)

In any case the player in that video did some serious practising homework  definitely more than just hitting 'purchase' and 'install'.


----------



## Rob (Dec 6, 2016)

Rob Elliott said:


> edit: perhaps something demo'd (solo) played more evocatively would show me its full range (ala Hillary Hahn, etc.). no doubt a wonderful fiddle instrument.



There's a lot of parameters to work with, and sonority can be changed in many ways... I had great fun doing a couple demos for them, and I find the violin behaves well with some care, like here:

http://www.sample-modeling.com/Demos/Strings/Violin/SMViolin_DebussySonata_2nd_movement_R.Soggetti.mp3

Really enjoyed bringing out the phrasing... I want to dedicate some time to better learn this instrument


----------



## LHall (Dec 6, 2016)

Just got the violin and played with it a few minutes. Really awesome instrument. 

Regarding the question "is it worth giving up sonic perfection for playability": I think the answer is usually "yes". However, so far with the violin I don't feel it's lacking in either category. I'm not a violinist, but I've worked with LOTS of them and I think this instrument nails it.


----------



## dgburns (Dec 6, 2016)

Baron Greuner said:


> Got to be honest folks and this is just an opinion from the safety of an armchair, there is something here that doesn't sound quite right.
> It seems to me that there's a lack of body and depth to the sound. Almost a little bit 2 dimensional.



The issue MIGHT be the breath controller. To me, it might be bringing a blown instrument vibe to a bowed instrument, especially higher up the register. Based on my travels with the SM stuff, I'd be looking to use a fader to do cc11 instead of the breath controller. Maybe if there was a new gadget able to emulate bow strokes into midi.... ???

I'm personally really excited about the whole SM range, more so then I've been for just about anything else that's come out in a long while. The strings included.


----------



## DSmolken (Dec 6, 2016)

Parsifal666 said:


> OUTSTANDING. You get a whole page of vibrato features


Ooh. All the more reason to look forward to Chris Hein's contrabass, too.


----------



## Daryl (Dec 6, 2016)

dgburns said:


> Maybe if there was a new gadget able to emulate bow strokes into midi.... ???


You mean like http://www.tech.dmu.ac.uk/~dylan/z/dylan/project/obow/ (this)?


----------



## rottoy (Dec 6, 2016)

Daryl said:


> You mean like http://www.tech.dmu.ac.uk/~dylan/z/dylan/project/obow/ (this)?


Kickstarter this mofo!


----------



## givemenoughrope (Dec 6, 2016)

Rob said:


> There's a lot of parameters to work with, and sonority can be changed in many ways... I had great fun doing a couple demos for them, and I find the violin behaves well with some care, like here:
> 
> http://www.sample-modeling.com/Demos/Strings/Violin/SMViolin_DebussySonata_2nd_movement_R.Soggetti.mp3
> 
> Really enjoyed bringing out the phrasing... I want to dedicate some time to better learn this instrument



This is pretty great!


----------



## Erik (Dec 6, 2016)

Roberto,
As usual very well done, bravo!


----------



## Parsifal666 (Dec 6, 2016)

DSmolken said:


> Ooh. All the more reason to look forward to Chris Hein's contrabass, too.



Yes, Chris has both the Cello and Double Bass coming, so there's a lot to look forward to!


----------



## JBacal (Dec 6, 2016)

Very impressive!

--Jay


----------



## robgb (Dec 6, 2016)

I bought the SWAM Violin this morning and LOVE it. It's such a pleasure to play. Quick and dirty test:


----------



## robgb (Dec 6, 2016)

By the way, regarding all the "synthy" claims, I'd really love for some of you guys to do a blind test. You obviously have a right to your opinion but I have to wonder if it's colored by the fact that you KNOW it's basically a synth. I've played this violin and the viola for laymen and musicians alike and they simply can't tell the difference between Sample Modeling's strings and the real thing. Someone even complimented me on my great bowing technique, LOL. And this person plays the viola. Frankly, I think those of us who use samples are sometimes a little too "aware" for our own good.


----------



## Lotias (Dec 6, 2016)

Any examples of a quartet made with SampleModeling yet?


----------



## LHall (Dec 6, 2016)

storyteller said:


> Reminds me of the Garritan Stradivari videos.... same developers though, right? I still use it from time to time, albeit with its quirks from not having been upgraded in some time. I prefer Bohemian Vioin in most compositions now - so easy to use (can't wait for portamentos... no rush there guys ). But compared to the original Garritan Stradivari, I much prefer the tone of this new violin. The original Stradivari lacked fullness in body. I'm eager to try this one out.
> 
> Also, I know it isn't fair to compare two VIs designed nearly a decade apart. The old one has just held up surprisingly well. The cello was (and still is) much more impressive though.


 First thing I did today was pull up the new SM Violin and my Garitan Strad (which I've still been using often). You are right that the tone of this is fuller and warmer. Of course it responds better to controllers just cause it's up to date. I can certainly imagine using both as a part of a quartet and running all instruments through VSS.


----------



## Hannes_F (Dec 6, 2016)

robgb said:


> Someone even complimented me on my great bowing technique


 with the infinite bow  but true, the new SWAM violin sounds better than the Garritan version.


----------



## robgb (Dec 6, 2016)

Lotias said:


> Any examples of a quartet made with SampleModeling yet?


 The violin was just released today. You might check their website. And the video in the OP comes close at the end.


----------



## PerryD (Dec 6, 2016)

I think the Violin sounds very nice at softer dynamics as well. A very short mp3 played in real time with my HB-1 BC. Fun stuff! -Perry-

[AUDIOPLUS=http://vi-control.net/community/attachments/soft-violin-mp3.6754/][/AUDIOPLUS]


----------



## robgb (Dec 6, 2016)

Hannes_F said:


> with the infinite bow  but true.


 Actually, if you use the "bowing" controls (which I don't have the skills for), you can shorten the bowing to a more realistic length.


----------



## PerryD (Dec 6, 2016)

PerryD said:


> I think the Violin sounds very nice at softer dynamics as well. A very short mp3 played in real time with my HB-1 BC. Fun stuff! -Perry-
> 
> [AUDIOPLUS=http://vi-control.net/community/attachments/soft-violin-mp3.6754/][/AUDIOPLUS]


 I mapped bow pressure to CC2. I think it yields a nice delicate effect when you play softly.


----------



## tonaliszt (Dec 6, 2016)

Really Impressive! Wow!


----------



## fratveno (Dec 6, 2016)

Virtual instrument, real musicianship...!
Thanks mr. Soggetti!


----------



## EuropaWill (Dec 6, 2016)

Though at times i think it sounds good, i'm constantly reminded that it sounds like the developers need to do a better job of modeling the bow and rosin sound and scripting it so that it behaves more like the actual instrument. I've noticed this on both the Viola and the Cello, and if you just close your eyes, it sounds very much like this instrument is blown, not bowed. It has a very artificial sound to my ears more than half the time. The Debussy example has some impressive moments where I can suspend my disbelief, and then it also has some quite artificial bow sounds as well that jump out as obviously synthetic with the majority of the issue the bow/rosin being too blown and not bitten.


----------



## thesteelydane (Dec 6, 2016)

Literally nothing about this sounds real to me, and the trio at the end is utterly cringeworthy in it's synthetic-nes. Sorry - I think Sample Modeling brass is amazing, but the strings have a long way to go.


----------



## NoamL (Dec 6, 2016)

Pulling out my string player card... I get the same uncanny effect from this Violin as from the SWAM Viola. It sounds like a clarinet that has had a string timbre strangely grafted onto its sustains. The attacks sound like breathy attacks not horsehair and rosin. Not enough friction! Totally agree with the previous comments on this. The bewildering hybrid-ness of the sound may be why people are calling it "synthy."

The agility of play and the smoothness of dynamic control is amazing. You have to give them credit for that.

I've heard breath controllers deliver amazing results for wind mockups but I dunno why people insist on using them to do strings as the method is not one bit more _apropos _than using a fader.

There isn't ANY solo string instrument out there yet that sounds truly convincing to me, unfortunately... the VSL Cello 2 is pretty good, though, as well as what I've heard of Chris Hein's strings. The Bohemian series is great within the constraints of its intended use.


----------



## Arbee (Dec 6, 2016)

I absolutely love SM trumpet, trombone and saxes to pieces, but just can't warm to the SM woodwinds or strings as yet. In certain registers they are quite convincing, but across the whole range they just don't quite get there for me. Given the incredible playability and tweaking that is available with SM I would so much "love to be in love", but sadly I'm not


----------



## jonathanprice (Dec 6, 2016)

rottoy said:


> Kickstarter this mofo!


The O-bow has an updated website that features its pilot production, now called bowsynth. Can't wait for this to be available.


----------



## pmcrockett (Dec 6, 2016)

I have a bow-like controller that I scripted from a graphics tablet. It's finicky and bizarre and I'm proud of it, but I'm not convinced that it's actually better than a breath controller. I'll definitely be watching Bowsynth.


----------



## givemenoughrope (Dec 6, 2016)

thesteelydane said:


> Literally nothing about this sounds real to me, and the trio at the end is utterly cringeworthy in it's synthetic-nes. Sorry - I think Sample Modeling brass is amazing, but the strings have a long way to go.



Sure, it doesn't sound real but judging by rob's mockup it can be pretty expressive. From a player's perspective wouldn't this make replacing solo parts easier?


----------



## jacobthestupendous (Dec 6, 2016)

robgb said:


> Someone even complimented me on my great bowing technique, LOL. And this person plays the viola.


That's low praise. Typical violists manage to land the bow on correct strings no more than about 40% of the time.


----------



## marcotronic (Dec 6, 2016)

EuropaWill said:


> ...and if you just close your eyes, it sounds very much like this instrument is blown, not bowed. ...



these were exactly my thoughts when I listened to the demos today!  I didn't even have to close my eyes.

Marco


----------



## ctsai89 (Dec 6, 2016)

NoamL said:


> Pulling out my string player card... I get the same uncanny effect from this Violin as from the SWAM Viola. It sounds like a clarinet that has had a string timbre strangely grafted onto its sustains. The attacks sound like breathy attacks not horsehair and rosin. Not enough friction! Totally agree with the previous comments on this. The bewildering hybrid-ness of the sound may be why people are calling it "synthy."
> 
> The agility of play and the smoothness of dynamic control is amazing. You have to give them credit for that.
> 
> ...



no way.. im a string player too in fact a cellist. The moment you mentioned that the viola sounds like clarinet, the first thought that came to me was THAT'S WHAT VIENNA's NEW SOLO CELLO 2 sounds like to me. EXTREMELY synthy but only to find out later you wrote that VSL sounded pretty good. IMO it really doesn't sound good. It has a lot of good true legato stuff in there but from D3~G4 sounds extremely synthy to me. I actually found Sample Modelling's Cello demoes quite a lot more convincing than VSL.


----------



## Lotias (Dec 6, 2016)

ctsai89 said:


> no way.. im a string player too in fact a cellist. The moment you mentioned that the viola sounds like clarinet, the first thought that came to me was THAT'S WHAT VIENNA's NEW SOLO CELLO 2 sounds like to me. EXTREMELY synthy but only to find out later you wrote that VSL sounded pretty good. IMO it really doesn't sound good. It has a lot of good true legato stuff in there but from D3~G4 sounds extremely synthy to me. I actually found Sample Modelling's Cello demoes quite a lot more convincing than VSL.


Strange to say it sounds synthy when it's recorded samples...


----------



## ctsai89 (Dec 6, 2016)

Lotias said:


> Strange to say it sounds synthy when it's recorded samples...



well LASS's cello solo sounds like that too. You can record violin/viola close but you can't record cello close especially if the mic is only in the front of the cello. A lot of the bass frequencies come out from all 8 directions and reverb back but if you record all that in the silent stage then yea.. you don't get a lot of the lower frequencies thus making it sound like it's been low cut. And for some reason there's not enough bow sound on a lot of the sustains in the range i mentioned.


----------



## Lotias (Dec 6, 2016)

ctsai89 said:


> well LASS's cello solo sounds like that too. You can record violin/viola close but you can't record cello close especially if the mic is only in the front of the cello. A lot of the bass frequencies come out from all 8 directions and reverb back but if you record all that in the silent stage then yea.. you don't get a lot of the lower frequencies thus making it sound like it's been low cut. And for some reason there's not enough bow sound on a lot of the sustains in the range i mentioned.


And yet it's a recording of a cello. Maybe you don't like the tone, but to say it sounds 'synthy' is the wrong term, I'd think.


----------



## Hannes_F (Dec 7, 2016)

Come on, where is the balance of mind? The SWAM violin sounds not extremely bad nor extremely stellar, but certainly better than average. I remember how I cringed at the demos of the Garritan Strad while everybody said how great it sounded, but this new violin is certainly better.

It is a well known phenomenon that instrumentalists who know nothing about sample technology overestimate virtual instruments because as a rule they are not used to critical, objective listening, instead they listen quite subjectively. So the test 'I played it to classical musicians and they could not tell it from the real thing' has happened since the beginning of sample technology and does not really mean much, especially if they are uninformed. Classical musicians can enjoy a recording through a portable radio or a telephone because their experience unconsciously replaces all that is missing.

At the same time players who know and use virtual instruments tend to be overcritical when it comes to their own instrument (guilty here too). Because everybody has his own style and quality criteria and that is hard to match, much less by a virtual instrument. That is why I hardly ever comment on virtual string instruments at all.

That being said this new SWAM violin seems to be quite transparent in regards of the musicality of the player, and how much that makes good of the sound part is an individual decision.


----------



## Hannes_F (Dec 7, 2016)

Come on, where is the balance of mind? The SWAM violin sounds not extremely bad nor extremely stellar, but certainly better than average.

It is a well known phenomenon that instrumentalists who know nothing about sample technology overestimate virtual instruments because as a rule they are not used to critical, objective listening, instead they listen quite subjectively. So the test 'I played it to classical musicians and they could not tell it from the real thing' has happened since the beginning of sample technology and does not really mean much, especially if they are uninformed. Classical musicians can enjoy a recording through a portable radio or a telephone because their experience unconsciously replaces all that is missing.

At the same time players who know and use virtual instruments tend to be overcritical when it comes to their own instrument (guilty here too). Because everybody has his own style and quality criteria and that is hard to match, much less by a virtual instrument. That is why I hardly ever comment on virtual string instruments at all.

That being said this SWAM violin is transparent in regards of the musicality of the player, and how much that makes good of the engineering part is an individual decision.


----------



## rottoy (Dec 7, 2016)

jonathanprice said:


> The O-bow has an updated website that features its pilot production, now called bowsynth. Can't wait for this to be available.


Thanks, didn't realize when I posted that the prototype video was 3 years old.
Hope he gets this out soon!


----------



## Baron Greuner (Dec 7, 2016)

jacobthestupendous said:


> That's low praise. Typical violists manage to land the bow on correct strings no more than about 40% of the time.



Stick a Viola on the dash of your car and you can park anywhere in the world for free.


----------



## nordicguy (Dec 7, 2016)

Hannes_F said:


> Come on, where is the balance of mind? The SWAM violin sounds not extremely bad nor extremely stellar, but certainly better than average.
> 
> It is a well known phenomenon that instrumentalists who know nothing about sample technology overestimate virtual instruments because as a rule they are not used to critical, objective listening, instead they listen quite subjectively. So the test 'I played it to classical musicians and they could not tell it from the real thing' has happened since the beginning of sample technology and does not really mean much, especially if they are uninformed. Classical musicians can enjoy a recording through a portable radio or a telephone because their experience unconsciously replaces all that is missing.
> 
> ...


A "Like" wouldn't do it.
Thanks for such a judicious comment.


----------



## thesteelydane (Dec 7, 2016)

givemenoughrope said:


> Sure, it doesn't sound real but judging by rob's mockup it can be pretty expressive. From a player's perspective wouldn't this make replacing solo parts easier?


Actually no. As a player I prefer properly marked up notation, and that the composer trusts my musicality and leaves a bit of room for interpretation.


----------



## Rob (Dec 7, 2016)

I have a hard time nderstanding this...what's got notation to do with the playability of the instrument...


----------



## robharvey (Dec 7, 2016)

Some of the demos are nice but not everyone has a £750 breath controller. 

Good for people who don't have access to a violin player. I'm of a mind to pick up a violin and learn over buying a library, have yet to find a convincing solo string lib. See you all in 10 years!


----------



## Rob (Dec 7, 2016)

robharvey said:


> Some of the demos are nice but not everyone has a £750 breath controller.
> 
> Good for people who don't have access to a violin player. I'm of a mind to pick up a violin and learn over buying a library, have yet to find a convincing solo string lib. See you all in 10 years!



I did the Debussy demo drawing controllers by hand in the daw, so a breath controller isn't strictly necessary, it helps though...


----------



## nordicguy (Dec 7, 2016)

Rob said:


> I have a hard time nderstanding this...what's got notation to do with the playability of the instrument...


Same thing here...


----------



## thesteelydane (Dec 7, 2016)

Rob said:


> I have a hard time nderstanding this...what's got notation to do with the playability of the instrument...


Nothing, I was answering givemeenoughrope's question about what I as a player prefer when replacing mocked up parts with real recordings.


----------



## robgb (Dec 7, 2016)

I just have to say again that I'd love to see those who are claiming "synthy" pass a blind test. Does it sound absolutely real? Of course it doesn't. NO SAMPLE LIBRARY DOES. But as I said before, I suspect that your opinions are colored by the fact that you know it's a synth, and the average layman (or client, for those of you working for others) wouldn't have a clue. Since the first "synthy" comment, I've checked out several violin libraries, and the real thing. And to my ears, this comes closer than any of the other libraries. And it's certainly much more of a joy to play.


----------



## paoling (Dec 7, 2016)

To me the problem of many virtual instruments (and I'm guilty for it) it's the claim to be a universally complete, definitive instrument. This violin sounds impressive to me in fast and agile phrasing and that's is often a difficult area to do right with sampled instruments. So it's sometimes more useful to concentrate on what a particular instrument can do right, where it can be impressive, and eventually opt for different alternatives for different genres of music.


----------



## tack (Dec 7, 2016)

robgb said:


> I just have to say again that I'd love to see those who are claiming "synthy" pass a blind test.


Would you be willing to set one up? Sounds like an interesting experiment.

To be fair, _most_ violin libraries sound synthy to me. I'm not sure I could differentiate SM from, say, Embertone's violin in a blind test, but I feel pretty confident I could distinguish either of those from the real thing for any nontrivial performance.


----------



## Silence-is-Golden (Dec 7, 2016)

To add to the 'most real' discussion, I think that the bohemian is the only one who passes the test for me.

The currently most agile one's seem to be SM and Chris Hein's in my view.
A blind test will surely be a nice test, but if I am honest about it, don't we all simply have a preference for one or the other.
And the whole discussion is actually about that.

Bottom line for me therefore is, whether the library I am using is part of the complete picture of using tools that support a creative process that leads to inspiring music.


----------



## ctsai89 (Dec 7, 2016)

Lotias said:


> And yet it's a recording of a cello. Maybe you don't like the tone, but to say it sounds 'synthy' is the wrong term, I'd think.



it does sound synthy. I almost thought I was listening to someone's demo straight out of box from Sibelius/finale when I was unconsciously listening to the vsl demoes.

sry for being stubborn.


----------



## robgb (Dec 7, 2016)

I guess the definition of "synthy" depends on the listener. I don't think it sounds synthy in the least. Go figure.


----------



## ctsai89 (Dec 7, 2016)

oops i just listend to chris hein's new cello that's coming out in 20 hours or so. THAT sounds damn real. Sorry VSL.


----------



## Parsifal666 (Dec 7, 2016)

ctsai89 said:


> oops i just listend to chris hein's new cello that's coming out in 20 hours or so. THAT sounds damn real. Sorry VSL.



Oh man, PSYCHED!


----------



## Lotias (Dec 7, 2016)

ctsai89 said:


> oops i just listend to chris hein's new cello that's coming out in 20 hours or so. THAT sounds damn real. Sorry VSL.


I always found the legato not so convincing on Chris Hein, probably because it's "intelligent" legato and not sampled. As far as I know. Or maybe I'm completely wrong, either way something is not right about the tone as far as the violin goes.

Also funny to mention that Chris Hein's cello is also close-miced...


----------



## robgb (Dec 7, 2016)

robharvey said:


> Some of the demos are nice but not everyone has a £750 breath controller.
> 
> Good for people who don't have access to a violin player. I'm of a mind to pick up a violin and learn over buying a library, have yet to find a convincing solo string lib. See you all in 10 years!


I think he's using a $100 breath controller.

http://www.tecontrol.se/products/usb-midi-breath-controller


----------



## LondonMike (Dec 7, 2016)

It's apparent that there will never be 100% consensus on the realism or authenticity of a VI just as the greatest string virtuosos in the world have their fans and their detractors. 
I guess it boils down to getting something or a few things that suits your needs.


----------



## Parsifal666 (Dec 7, 2016)

I have Friedlander, EW Gold Solo, and Chris Hein. I use and love them all.

East West put out both a solo violin and cello that actually sound pretty darn good. Must be the end of the world.


----------



## NoamL (Dec 7, 2016)

Go for it gents. Name them all. I will post the answers tomorrow.



#1 at 0:00 is ________
#2 at 0:31 is ________
#3 at 0:50 is ________
#4 at 1:12 is ________
#5 at 1:27 is ________
#6 at 1:43 is ________
#7 at 2:02 is ________
#8 at 2:22 is ________
#9 at 2:43 is ________
#10 at 2:56 is ________
#11 at 3:15 is ________
#12 at 3:29 is ________
#13 at 3:37 is ________
#14 at 3:42 is ________
#15 at 3:55 is ________


I cannot take the test myself (obviously) but while putting this together, I came up with three general observations

1. I have no problem telling real violin from the libraries, in a _variety_ of contexts (hint hint)... no developer has really nailed this instrument yet.

2. Bohemian Violin is a darn good VI! It _might_ fool me in a well designed demo that played to its strengths. But there is a lot it can't do. There are two other developers in here (that I'm not going to name yet) that feel "good enough for mockup work" and that have more general strengths, but are instantly recognizable as VIs in my opinion.

3. Sample Modeling Violin feels like the fakest of the bunch. It's not even close - it's on another tier _below_ all the Violin VIs. I would be surprised if people have trouble picking out SMV from the other VIs here.


----------



## ctsai89 (Dec 7, 2016)

Lotias said:


> I always found the legato not so convincing on Chris Hein, probably because it's "intelligent" legato and not sampled. As far as I know. Or maybe I'm completely wrong, either way something is not right about the tone as far as the violin goes.
> 
> Also funny to mention that Chris Hein's cello is also close-miced...



yea but seems like vsl close micced in a different position than those one's that sounded more real.


----------



## tack (Dec 7, 2016)

NoamL said:


> Go for it gents. Name them all. I will post the answers tomorrow.


Ah fun! Thanks for throwing this together. I look forward to having mistaken some fake instruments as real so I know what to buy. 

My answers within:


Spoiler



#1 at 0:00 is real
#2 at 0:31 is fake (classic Bohemian see-saw!)
#3 at 0:50 is real
#4 at 1:12 is real
#5 at 1:27 is real (on the fence -- agile phrasing but iffy performance )
#6 at 1:43 is real
#7 at 2:02 is fake
#8 at 2:22 is fake
#9 at 2:43 is fake (ouch my bleeding ears!)
#10 at 2:56 is fake (was tempted to put real but I think I recognize this as the Bohemian)
#11 at 3:15 is real (if this is fake I'll buy it)
#12 at 3:29 is real
#13 at 3:37 is fake
#14 at 3:42 is real (on the fence -- I just needed to hear a few more notes of the phrase)
#15 at 3:55 is fake


----------



## robharvey (Dec 7, 2016)

robgb said:


> I think he's using a $100 breath controller.
> 
> http://www.tecontrol.se/products/usb-midi-breath-controller




Thank Rob  good name.

He's got a Hornberg Research hb1 Midi Breath Station sat on his keyboard. Lovely thing with a really nice sensor in it.


----------



## Parsifal666 (Dec 7, 2016)

All I know is, the clips all sound good. I really don't have a problem with the "authenticity" issue, because some of (I wish one heck of a lot more of) my music has been played by actual ensembles and orchestras. For me the sample libraries simply make the writing of music itself a lot more attractive. I'll never forget my first month with the English Horn from Hollywood Woodwinds, I improvised forever on it, and came up with a million ideas for more woodwind-oriented pieces. That to me is the best part of the libraries: they make it so I look forward to writing.

All the solo string libraries I own get me writing.


----------



## LondonMike (Dec 7, 2016)

NoamL said:


> Go for it gents. Name them all. I will post the answers tomorrow.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I think it's hard to make a fair appraisal of the different examples as some are solo, some are in an ensemble, some playing certain articulations and others not. However I'll be very interested in seeing the results.
Thanks for the effort.


----------



## tack (Dec 7, 2016)

LondonMike said:


> However I'll be very interested in seeing the results.


The results will be much more interesting if you take a stab at guessing which snippets are real and which are fake, though.


----------



## synergy543 (Dec 7, 2016)

Hannes_F said:


> Come on, where is the balance of mind? The SWAM violin sounds not extremely bad nor extremely stellar, but certainly better than average.
> 
> It is a well known phenomenon that instrumentalists who know nothing about sample technology overestimate virtual instruments because as a rule they are not used to critical, objective listening, instead they listen quite subjectively. So the test 'I played it to classical musicians and they could not tell it from the real thing' has happened since the beginning of sample technology and does not really mean much, especially if they are uninformed. Classical musicians can enjoy a recording through a portable radio or a telephone because their experience unconsciously replaces all that is missing.
> 
> ...



I like your way of thinking Hannes! A fair, reasonable and honest perspective. I concur 100%. 

And yes, we could use more balanced perspective on things these days.


----------



## aleki3419 (Dec 7, 2016)

1 - real
2 - embertone
3 - chris hein
4 - 8dio Studio violin
5 - A
6 - virharmonic
7 - fluffy violin
8 - Sample modeling violin
9 - Orchestral Tools violin
10- Auddict Virtuoso Violin
11 - real
12 - Kirk hunter
13 - spitfire audio solos strings
14 - ?
15 - Orchestral Tools violin


----------



## robgb (Dec 7, 2016)

NoamL said:


> Go for it gents. Name them all. I will post the answers tomorrow.



After listening to all of these, I'm VERY GLAD I got the Sample Modeling violin. The majority of these sound horrible.


----------



## robgb (Dec 7, 2016)

By the way, these are all recorded under such different conditions, with different rooms, different reverbs, different players, that it's hard to make a good comparison. Ideally, you'd want several sample libraries playing the same thing under the same conditions.


----------



## NoamL (Dec 7, 2016)

Yes ideally I would own every sample library! But I don't  all these examples are just stolen from the internet.

TBH I don't think that space/reverb makes as much difference to the tone of a violin as it does for brass instr. The Sample Modeling brass instruments sound pretty silly out of the box but then sound _amazing_ with the right verbs and stage placement. But with strings, I don't think the "practice room sound" and "on stage sound" are that different at all. It's more about: did you capture the right string tone, did you capture the sound of the bow & the rosin on the attack, are there realistic bow changes, and do sequences of notes feel like they have musical intent or are they just flat... I agree with @robgb that some of these VI excerpts - which I didn't choose with any prejudicial intent, btw - are simply not adequate at imitating the real thing especially with a harsh A/B comparison where you can hear pretty-obviously live violin right before or after.

No more hints, but: there have been plenty of correct guesses so far!


----------



## robgb (Dec 7, 2016)

NoamL said:


> TBH I don't think that space/reverb makes as much difference to the tone of a violin as it does for brass instr. The Sample Modeling brass instruments sound pretty silly out of the box but then sound _amazing_ with the right verbs and stage placement. But with strings, I don't think the "practice room sound" and "on stage sound" are that different at all.


 Intonation is important with any instrument, but even a dry real violin sounds pretty boring, much like a dry human voice. Delay/space/reverb make a huge difference.


----------



## rdieters (Dec 7, 2016)

robgb said:


> I think he's using a $100 breath controller.
> 
> http://www.tecontrol.se/products/usb-midi-breath-controller




He also has a Yamaha BC3


----------



## Lee Blaske (Dec 8, 2016)

Installed it this afternoon, and I'm really loving it. Still need time to get full command of what it can do (which looks like a LOT), but here's my first "get acquainted" track with it. (FWIW, the background textures are from Spitfire Albion V Tundra)...

https://www.reverbnation.com/leeblaske/song/27120133-lullaby-for-violin


----------



## DSmolken (Dec 8, 2016)

OK, let's play. Just listened through once.



Spoiler: answers



#1 at 0:00 is real
#2 at 0:31 is fake
#3 at 0:50 is fake (and from a library which includes performance backgrond noises)
#4 at 1:12 is fake
#5 at 1:27 is fake (or a real student)
#6 at 1:43 is real
#7 at 2:02 is fake (and the most "synthy" to my ears)
#8 at 2:22 is fake
#9 at 2:43 is fake
#10 at 2:56 is real (or a real good fake)
#11 at 3:15 is fake
#12 at 3:29 is real
#13 at 3:37 is fake
#14 at 3:42 is real
#15 at 3:55 is fake


----------



## Arbee (Dec 8, 2016)

Lee Blaske said:


> Installed it this afternoon, and I'm really loving it. Still need time to get full command of what it can do (which looks like a LOT), but here's my first "get acquainted" track with it. (FWIW, the background textures are from Spitfire Albion V Tundra)...
> 
> https://www.reverbnation.com/leeblaske/song/27120133-lullaby-for-violin


Beautiful track, very expressive. As an electric violin I believe it does extremely well. Nice!


----------



## Baron Greuner (Dec 8, 2016)

Verrrry Nice track Lee. Still got the corgi the Queen gave you I see.

Arbee is right. It sounds like an electric violin. I knew there was something when I first heard it. Ha!


----------



## Gzu (Dec 8, 2016)

Daryl said:


> You mean like http://www.tech.dmu.ac.uk/~dylan/z/dylan/project/obow/ (this)?



Or like this! 

https://www.leapmotion.com/


----------



## Parsifal666 (Dec 8, 2016)

Once again science fiction (Tony Stark's amazing computers from the Iron Man movies) is becoming fact!


----------



## DSmolken (Dec 8, 2016)

I was hoping for more blind test guesses in here...


----------



## Living Fossil (Dec 8, 2016)

robgb said:


> I just have to say again that I'd love to see those who are claiming "synthy" pass a blind test. Does it sound absolutely real? Of course it doesn't. NO SAMPLE LIBRARY DOES. But as I said before, I suspect that your opinions are colored by the fact that you know it's a synth, and the average layman (or client, for those of you working for others) wouldn't have a clue. Since the first "synthy" comment, I've checked out several violin libraries, and the real thing. And to my ears, this comes closer than any of the other libraries. And it's certainly much more of a joy to play.



True indeed.
A funny and interesting thing that happens quite often is that if you use some real instruments inside of mockups, people point at the real ones complaining how unreal they sound.


----------



## Parsifal666 (Dec 8, 2016)

Living Fossil said:


> True indeed.
> A funny and interesting thing that happens quite often is that if you use some real instruments inside of mockups, people point at the real ones complaining how unreal they sound.



This has happened to me lol! I have to strain mightily to keep a straight face.


----------



## tack (Dec 8, 2016)

Living Fossil said:


> A funny and interesting thing that happens quite often is that if you use some real instruments inside of mockups, people point at the real ones complaining how unreal they sound.


I expect I'm guilty of this too. Oftentimes the tone of a real recording is just unpleasant and it's easy to mistake it for a fake on that basis alone, at least until you hear the articulation, transitions, and general technique come out. For example, #5 in Norm's example, my first reaction was fake just on the tone. But after a couple listens, the transitions were too convincing, so I assumed it was a student practicing in a classroom or something.

Some of the other ones I classified as real I wasn't overly impressed with, but they convinced me on general expressiveness and, to the extent I could hear it (i.e. exposed solos), lack of phasing in the transitions. The only one I'm really excited to be wrong about is #11. If that's fake, I'll be buying it.


----------



## DSmolken (Dec 8, 2016)

Yeah, #5 is the most interesting one in the blind test. Either a student practicing or a not very good sample set with a fair amount of inconsistency to the attacks and a scratchy tone. I guessed fake in the end.


----------



## Living Fossil (Dec 8, 2016)

tack said:


> I expect I'm guilty of this too. Oftentimes the tone of a real recording is just unpleasant.



I was not speaking about unpleasant recordings or practicing students (haven't heard the examples in this blind test though). I was rather refering to situations where the listeners got nervous by the thought that a faked instrument could sound really good. Often, they got really emotional.
Then again, i also occasionally thought that some orchestras were fake when in fact they just played in a really boring way.


----------



## NoamL (Dec 8, 2016)

Last chance to guess and cover yourself with glory (or something else)... I will post the results on my lunch break


----------



## ctsai89 (Dec 8, 2016)

Wow, i just had the chance to try out from my friend's workstation the sample modeling trumpet.. Wow...SO playable and realistic sounding.


----------



## tack (Dec 8, 2016)

NoamL said:


> I will post the results on my lunch break


Looking forward to it.

I was listening to the new CH Solo Strings intro video and it passes the realism test for me quite a lot of the time. I'm not totally sold on the general tone, but in terms of expressiveness and phrasing agility, it's pretty impressive for a non-modeled instrument. So I wouldn't be too surprised if at least one of those excerpts I marked as real is actually from CH. I'm looking forward to being forced to revise my thinking.


----------



## NoamL (Dec 8, 2016)

Results!




#1 at 0:00 is Live
#2 at 0:31 is Friedlander Violin
#3 at 0:50 is Chris Hein Solo Violin (the clicks are from keyboard/breath controller and not part of the VI)
#4 at 1:12 is Live
#5 at 1:27 is Live
#6 at 1:43 is Friedlander Violin
#7 at 2:02 is VSL Solo Strings Violin 1
#8 at 2:22 is Bohemian Violin
#9 at 2:43 is Auddict Virtuoso Violin
#10 at 2:56 is Bohemian Violin again
#11 at 3:15 is Live
#12 at 3:29 is Sample Modeling Violin
#13 at 3:37 is Berlin First Chairs Violin 1
#14 at 3:42 is Sample Modeling Violin again
#15 at 3:55 is Sacconi Quartet Violin 1

Overall, live performances were correctly guessed for the most part. Among the VI’s, the *Sample Modeling* Violin fooled the most people (slightly more than half of the time, people thought it was real), followed by *Friedlander*, *Chris Hein*, and *Bohemian*. The *VSL*, *Berlin*, and *Spitfire* solo violins didn’t fool a single guesser. The Auddict violin not only didn’t fool anyone but several people complained about the tone...

This is NOT the result I expected! I continue to insist that the SM Violin sounds _obviously_ fake to my ears, quite on par with the Auddict violin. But, the crowd has spoken, and I will not throw any more shade on your verdict 




By the way, I played a little trick here… just to see what people’s thoughts would be…

I tried to make it seem like all the “violin by itself” excerpts were sample library demos and the “violin in context” was real. But #5 is real. And an amateur. @tack guessed well! I just searched Youtube for "practicing violin" and found a Youtuber who posted her progress through lessons. She’s been playing for three years and this recording isn’t even in a good acoustic space...



Yet her performance, however iffy, feels more real to me than the Sacconi Quartet, which is world class players, in an amazing hall, recorded by great engineers & developed by Spitfire Audio.

Also, #4 is Lindsey Stirling who is a professional touring violinist. Listen to the difference between #4 and #5, and then the difference between either of them and any of the VI examples. I think the point is made that if you need solo violin for a track, hiring a musician, whether a pro or an amateur, should be at the top of your mind... Especially if it's not a technically demanding piece of music. If it's just a _cantabile_ legato line to give your trailer track soulful flair, call a violinist! With the VIs currently available, the musical intent & phrasing just isn’t fully there, and Bohemian is the only dev that comes close IMO. And unlike hiring an orchestra, hiring a single amateur musician should be within budget for many of us here.

There are so many great orchestral string libraries out there, but I think the bar is higher with solo instruments. CSS and Mural feel incredibly competitive to me vs hiring a string orchestra for a short film (just on a cost-vs-quality basis! obviously if quality is all that counts then the musicians win every time). But I wouldn't reach for ANY of these VI's if I had a crucial violin solo on a track.


----------



## robgb (Dec 8, 2016)

NoamL said:


> Among the VI’s, the *Sample Modeling* Violin fooled the most people (slightly more than half of the time, people thought it was real),


 I rest my case...


----------



## Niel (Dec 8, 2016)

NoamL said:


> Go for it gents. Name them all. I will post the answers tomorrow.






Spoiler



#1 at 0:00 is real
#2 at 0:31 is fake
#3 at 0:50 is fake
#4 at 1:12 is real
#5 at 1:27 is real?
#6 at 1:43 is fake
#7 at 2:02 is fake
#8 at 2:22 is fake
#9 at 2:43 is fake
#10 at 2:56 is real
#11 at 3:15 is real
#12 at 3:29 is fake
#13 at 3:37 is fake
#14 at 3:42 is fake
#15 at 3:55 is fake



UPD. Bohemian


----------



## StefanoLucato (Dec 8, 2016)

Hello everyone !
Sorry for my english…
Interesting discussion and interesting comparative Test.
I would like to make some clarifications.
A Sample library uses real instrument sound, so the timbre is obviously realistic. 
Why then a V.I. manufacturer should choose the difficult path of the modeling?
Apart from a small component of madness, the answer is simply the expression, but more important, the management of expressiveness!
The modeling instruments are based on equations that virtually reproduce the physical mechanics of a real instrument, the modeling doesn't acts directly on the sound, but the sound can be defined as the consequence of the kinetic mechanisms of the instrument, if the mechanical model is correct and close to the real one also the sound produced will be similar, but the most interesting thing is that also the behavioral interactions of the sound elements will be organics and consistent with the mechanism. We often recognize a specific instrument for how it reacts in time.
The comparison should therefore not be based only on the timbre of sound, but also on the expressive management ... Imagine a demo of a single note: A crescendo with a vibrato that speeds up and slows down then decrease in intensity... etc. how to play it with a library?
The fact that a modeling instrument is compared with real instruments or samples in a sense flatters us. 
Then many customers tell us that our instruments are fun to play, specially experimenting with various physical parameters (eg. BowPressure, BowPosition ..)
We will work hard to further improve the sound quality while maintaining at the same time the great flexibility and organic coherence that characterizes the modeled instruments.
Thank you all for the advice and support. 

Best
Stefano Lucato
SWAM team


----------



## ctsai89 (Dec 8, 2016)

NoamL said:


> Results!
> 
> 
> 
> ...





LOL yea sorry but sample modeling owns them all. I'm a huge fan of their solo instruments although I haven't owned one yet. I've tried them


----------



## quantum7 (Dec 8, 2016)

There is something about the SM Violin's tone that doesn't always sound right to my ears. I would still use my favorite sample violins any day over this in my compositions...that is IF I couldn't use the real deal, which I always prefer. SM is getting close though.


----------



## tack (Dec 8, 2016)

NoamL said:


> #11 at 3:15 is Live


Damn! This was the only one I was rooting for being fake. I was fooled twice by SM being real on the basis of agility and phrasing but I really wasn't keen on the tone.

The biggest surprise for me is that I was caught out by the Friedlander. I own it and always found it, uh, well, synthy. 

Thanks for putting this together Noam. Great fun! And terribly humbling, as these blind tests always are.


----------



## PerryD (Dec 9, 2016)

rdieters said:


> He also has a Yamaha BC3




I no longer have the TEC or the BC3. -Perry-


----------



## erikradbo (Dec 9, 2016)

Tried it out before checking the answers, came up with the following:
1. Great tone, real
2. I hear some weird legato shifts, fake
3. Weird room, is this because live recording, real
4. Sounds great, but hard with all the other instruments, real
5. Sounds real and a bit sour, prob real
6. Very synthetic, fake
7. Worst ever, some built in VI in a DAW, fake
8. Hard to tell with only high notes, but sounds really good.
9. Uneven and unrealistic, fake
10. Like a lot, is this Bohemian? Fake
11. Sounds very much like a VI, fake
12. Nice tone but unrealistic in the attack, fake
13. Synthetic, fake
14. Unrealistic, fake
15. Too much chorus and a weird legato, fake

Looking at the answer I'm happy to see Bohemian was no 10. Very surprised that 11 is live, but after listening again, maybe the quite middy sound is fooling. Agreeing with OP that Sample modeling sounds unrealistic. Was very close to buying Friedlander instead of Bohemian, but here I didn't like Friedlander at all...


----------



## Melodioso (Dec 9, 2016)

erikradbo said:


> Tried it out before checking the answers, came up with the following:
> 1. Great tone, real
> 2. I hear some weird legato shifts, fake
> 3. Weird room, is this because live recording, real
> ...



Reading this post, I am having one minute of silence for all the developers who spent an incredible amount of time to create these VIs... that got totally destroyed in 5 minutes. Ouch.

That said, having listened to the SM Violin, and how quickly you can create a semi-realistic rendition, I am convinced this is the future of VIs in general. The other stuff would just take too long to arrive at a similar (unsatisfying still) result.


----------



## Baron Greuner (Dec 9, 2016)

It's all about tone. Playability is obviously an added bonus. The Bohemian violin wins the tone contest hands down.


----------



## DSmolken (Dec 9, 2016)

Melodioso said:


> That said, having listened to the SM Violin, and how quickly you can create a semi-realistic rendition, I am convinced this is the future of VIs in general.


Same here, though I'm biased as a developer. Coming up with fancy ways to emulate things is more interesting than editing thousands and thousands of samples to capture variations in technique.


----------



## robgb (Dec 9, 2016)

Melodioso said:


> Reading this post, I am having one minute of silence for all the developers who spent an incredible amount of time to create these VIs... that got totally destroyed in 5 minutes. Ouch.
> 
> That said, having listened to the SM Violin, and how quickly you can create a semi-realistic rendition, I am convinced this is the future of VIs in general. The other stuff would just take too long to arrive at a similar (unsatisfying still) result.


 With the SM Violin, I feel as if we're arguing over whether or not the guy who painted a portrait of the President made his nose a little too big. Most people will look at the painting and see the President. And that's all that counts. The truth is, many of the people who responded to this little test thought the SM violin was real. Kudos to SM for fooling them. It's easy to spot a fake when you already know it's a fake.


----------



## Baron Greuner (Dec 9, 2016)

I don't get this fooling people thing here.


----------



## Rob (Dec 9, 2016)

Baron Greuner said:


> It's all about tone. Playability is obviously an added bonus. The Bohemian violin wins the tone contest hands down.


I disagree... it's not all about the tone, not more than listening to an actor doing Hamlet and thinking that the actor's voice is all that matters... the actual content, and the ability of the actor to convey it is at least as important...


----------



## Daryl (Dec 9, 2016)

Melodioso said:


> Reading this post, I am having one minute of silence for all the developers who spent an incredible amount of time to create these VIs... that got totally destroyed in 5 minutes. Ouch.


No different from a client clicking on your masterpiece, and then saying "no that's no good".


----------



## robgb (Dec 9, 2016)

Baron Greuner said:


> I don't get this fooling people thing here.


More than half the people who responded to the "blind" test thought the SM violin was real.


----------



## Baron Greuner (Dec 9, 2016)

Rob, generally actors aren't blending their voices with other actors voices. Blind tests are a nice game to play at Christmas but in the world of samples, why are we even bothering to have this conversation.

I have a pretty good real violin and it's a lot better than I am a player. The difference between the tone of that violin and another real violin is a pretty moot point, because a crap player would make a Strad sound like shit or a Steinway ect. And I can testify to that.

Comparing sampled violins, or indeed, sampled anything only really means anything if the final sound or production of a piece is acceptable. It's not fooling people. They either like or they don't, or worse, they are indifferent.

Why anyone would want to get into a long, drawn out conversation about a sampled violin and it's shortcomings (or not) is a mystery.


----------



## robgb (Dec 9, 2016)

Baron Greuner said:


> Rob, generally actors aren't blending their voices with other actors voices. Blind tests are a nice game to play at Christmas but in the world of samples, why are we even bothering to have this conversation.
> 
> I have a pretty good real violin and it's a lot better than I am a player. The difference between the tone of that violin and another real violin is a pretty moot point, because a crap player would make a Strad sound like shit or a Steinway ect. And I can testify to that.
> 
> ...


You're confusing Robs. I didn't say anything about acting. As for fooling people, you'd have to actually be part of the conversation to understand why I used that term. If we're talking about lay people, then you're right. The end result is all that matters. And that has been one of my points from the beginning.

As for long drawn out conversations about a sampled violin... This entire site is dedicated to long drawn out conversations about virtual instruments. Maybe you somehow landed here by mistake?


----------



## Rob (Dec 9, 2016)

haha I love when things get this messy...


----------



## rottoy (Dec 9, 2016)

Sometimes I wonder if "Baron Greuner" is an alternate account of "re-peat".


----------



## Baron Greuner (Dec 9, 2016)

Look, if someone makes a fairly innocuous comment about a product, whether it be gushing or not gushing, why oh why do you need to have some sort of autopsy? It's a comment on a product. If comments on products do not somehow comply or fit in with your world, you surely can't be that insecure as to want to suddenly become forensic in your quest as to why? If you like it, buy it. If you don't, don't. 

F**k me, this is like being in The Village from The Prisoner. Why did you resign etc.


----------



## Parsifal666 (Dec 9, 2016)

I'm wondering if all this talk about how "real" these strings sound is a bit of a fool's errand (just an expression, no harm meant). You're not going to get that, especially with solo strings. All you'll probably ever get is an approximation that enhances your sketches. Maybe instead we could put more energy toward figuring out which solo library most fits our musical needs.

At times I can't help but be curious if the folks who are obsessing over "authenticity" (plus going on and on about bargains, etc.) aren't taking an inordinate time out of their studying, composing, etc.

Of course hey, more power to folks to do whatever the heck they want, that's everyone's righteous prerogative. I'm just saying.


----------



## robgb (Dec 9, 2016)

Baron Greuner said:


> Look, if someone makes a fairly innocuous comment about a product, whether it be gushing or not gushing, why oh why do you need to have some sort of autopsy? It's a comment on a product. If comments on products do not somehow comply or fit in with your world, you surely can't be that insecure as to want to suddenly become forensic in your quest as to why? If you like it, buy it. If you don't, don't.
> 
> F**k me, this is like being in The Village from The Prisoner. Why did you resign etc.


I think you're confused about who the medical examiner is in this situation. Nobody's analyzing the comments here but you. I'm not sure if you're trying to pick a fight or something, but I'm not even remotely interested in playing that game.


----------



## Baron Greuner (Dec 9, 2016)

All I will conclude with is, if you've bought it and it works for you, then I hope you'll both be very happy together.


----------



## robgb (Dec 9, 2016)

Parsifal666 said:


> At times I can't help but be curious if the folks who are obsessing over "authenticity" (plus going on and on about bargains, etc.) aren't taking an inordinate time out of their studying, composing, etc.


 Here's the thing. The whole point of sample libraries is to create a sort of authenticity. That's why they exist. Whether or not we choose to use or ignore that authenticity (in the way we play) is a creative choice. But, obviously, because they do exist and every sample library is trying to sound more realistic than the next, we have conversations about whether or not they have succeeded. Equally obvious is that our opinions on this differ. 

But thanks to sample libraries, many composers are able to realize the sounds in their mind in ways we never have before and the end result is often indistinguishable from hiring our own orchestra. Or guitarist. Or drummer. Or oboe player. Or solo violinist.

It only makes sense that we want to talk about it and debate the merits of various libraries. I assume that's why we're all here.


----------



## Baron Greuner (Dec 9, 2016)

I would agree about the perceived authenticity. After all, why call a violin section a violin section if it didn't actually sound vaguely like a violin section.
But to many musicians here, that isn't that important. For me, it's all about money. I try and write tracks that are going to make money for me, the publishers and the distributors/agents. I'm not a filmscore writer. Ergo, the realism factor of sample libraries doesn't come into it. It's more a matter of personal taste based on comparisons to other sample libraries.
I just saw I had a pretty good PRS day today and look forward to seeing the statements next week. Whatever the track or tracks were that did most of the damage, I can assure anyone that's interested, they're not that realistic sounding.


----------



## Parsifal666 (Dec 9, 2016)

Baron Greuner said:


> I would agree about the perceived authenticity. After all, why call a violin section a violin section if it didn't actually sound vaguely like a violin section.
> But to many musicians here, that isn't that important. For me, it's all about money. I try and write tracks that are going to make money for me, the publishers and the distributors/agents. I'm not a filmscore writer. Ergo, the realism factor of sample libraries doesn't come into it. It's more a matter of personal taste based on comparisons to other sample libraries.
> I just saw I had a pretty good PRS day today and look forward to seeing the statements next week. Whatever the track or tracks were that did most of the damage, I can assure anyone that's interested, they're not that realistic sounding.



Your money goal is at least partly sympathized with by me. I'm grateful every day I can pay the rent with what I do (with very little left over lol!). But I'm a foolish idealist, I write as one of those insufferable "artiste" types as well.

Even more insufferable and probably not entirely healthy, I dream of having things the way Beethoven did (without even pre_*tend*_ing to have his skills): that is, to have both. Money *and* artistic recognition. I know, I know, I have a better chance of becoming a professional athlete than have it both ways. Sigh...but continuing to dream.


----------



## LondonMike (Dec 9, 2016)

No 5 was the only one I was sure was live because of the inconsistent tone and tuning! LOL.
Apart from that I found it quite hard. A violin that sounds quite realistic playing slow legato lines may be horrendous at fast or staccato lines. And EQ and reverb play a part.

I have Friedlander, LASS first chair and VSL SE solo strings. I've never had satisfaction from the Friedlander but have used the other two with some success bearing in mind the writing has to be tailored to the instrument (unfortunately).

I've also recorded real violin a few times and it ain't no picnic! I know from having the SM saxes and brass that they are capable of the greatest amount of expressiveness apart from the real thing. That is, if I have a line in my head, I'll be able to render it as far as articulation, dynamics and emotion goes but unfortunately the saxes do sound synthetic and I haven't been able to get much use out of them apart from 'buried in the mix and doubled". The brass is amazing though.

I think the SM solo strings fall between the saxes and brass. I believe the violin would be a joy to play but I'm worried about the sound. 
Also, it's hard to assess an instrument without using for ones own music. You can only tell so much from someone else demos.

Thanks to NoamL for the quiz!


----------



## DSmolken (Dec 9, 2016)

I thought 5 was fake because I've recorded samples like that, haha.


----------



## ctsai89 (Dec 9, 2016)

For some reason vsl always sound synthy but sometimes or a lot of times beautifully synthy


----------



## LondonMike (Dec 9, 2016)

Parsifal666 said:


> I dream of having things the way Beethoven did (without even pre_*tend*_ing to have his skills): that is, to have both. Money *and* artistic recognition.



Ah yes! The days of the great art-music composer, recognised and respected by the critics, peers and the public at large are long gone! But that's a discussion for another thread!


----------



## Baron Greuner (Dec 9, 2016)

Parsifal666 said:


> Your money goal is at least partly sympathized with by me. I'm grateful every day I can pay the rent with what I do (with very little left over lol!). But I'm a foolish idealist, I write as one of those insufferable "artiste" types as well.
> 
> Even more insufferable and probably not entirely healthy, I dream of having things the way Beethoven did (without even pre_*tend*_ing to have his skills): that is, to have both. Money *and* artistic recognition. I know, I know, I have a better chance of becoming a professional athlete than have it both ways. Sigh...but continuing to dream.



You probably have the skills of Beethoven, but you just haven't learnt to harness them yet.

Not to go too far away from the SM violin, if I want to enjoy myself with music or let's say a musical instrument, either real or inside the computer, then I just play around making a noise and some vaguely musical phrases. Can do that for hours.
Therefore, if for example, the Sample Modelling Violin gives a person that kind of enjoyment, then it's done it's job. It works and nothing anyone can say about the tone, whether it suits them or not, should matter.

But then when it comes down to having to write 15 tracks for an album, all of the same genre, I would say that by the time you get to track 5, it's a lot less enjoyable and has very little to do with artistic recognition and certainly bugger all to do with Beethoven. 

Nevertheless, there's absolutely nothing wrong with being an idealist in my book.

As long as you can fill the Porsche up with petrol.


----------



## ctsai89 (Dec 9, 2016)

sample modeling i believe will be the future of VST.. only question is: will they ever make string ensemble vsts? i can't live without a full orhcestra of sample modeling


----------



## robgb (Dec 9, 2016)

ctsai89 said:


> sample modeling i believe will be the future of VST.. only question is: will they ever make string ensemble vsts? i can't live without a full orhcestra of sample modeling


I read somewhere that they were working on ensembles, but that was several years ago. I have no idea if this is still the plan.


----------



## NoamL (Dec 9, 2016)

This discussion reminds me of those GPS voice apps. That's a kind of sampling, isn't it? 

_*Take the*_ _second_ exit on the *RIGHT* hand side.... you will arrive at your destination at *TWO. FORTY-TWO.* _p. m._

The words never feel like they add up to a meaning. You are never fooled into believing a real human is talking to you. The timbre of the human voice is captured perfectly, and the pronunciation of each individual word is flawless. What's missing is the way a word would be pronounced with ever-so-subtle differences in different contexts. Without those subtle shadings, it's quite obvious that you are listening to a collection of disconnected words with no overall semantic structure. No meaning is being delivered. Nobody is really talking to you.

In other words the "tone" and the "playability" can be there till the cows come home but it doesn't matter because the MUSICALITY is missing.

This is the ground issue with every sample library that has sustains and legato transitions, once you get past basic quality problems. Even if note A is perfect and note B is perfect and the A-B transition is sampled perfectly, what is missing is the musical story that a musician would create out of those notes. "A, and then! B...." Doing dynamic crossfading is a completely monodimensional and inadequate imitation of all the subtle ways that a musician inflects the tone of their instrument.

You may believe a library or mockup is "stunningly real" but if you played that mockup with a real orchestra you would instantly be disabused of that notion. Sample libraries are _nowhere close_ to the real thing. This is really apparent when you look at phrase libraries and how recordings of even the most elementary ostinatos or fanfare figures seem to have more musical meaning than stitching together the same phrases with patches. Check out the brass fanfares in Sonokinetic's Maximo, for instance. A trumpet playing "Ta-ka-ta Daaaaa!" feels more real when the entire figure is recorded, instead of the approach in HWB, Berlin Brass etc of a "triplet repetition patch" abutting a "long marcato" patch. There's nothing wrong with the individual samples of the second approach, the problem is the *"GPS Effect."* You can't just record a "long marcato" and expect it to work in every context just like you can't just record the word "LEFT" and expect to be able to throw it into every possible sentence with the same level of realism.

Try it yourself, say the following aloud in a casual way: 

_"Turn left. The destination is on your left hand side." _

You probably said the first left with a lower tone, slower and a final/imperative quality. While the second left was slightly higher pitch, less emphasis on "t" and considerably faster, almost elided into "hand." 

Lefts aren't created equal 

As I see it there are three totally distinct benchmarks we are talking about here:

1. What is good enough to impress a layperson (or client)

2. What is good enough to impress you, someone who keeps up with VIs, and inspire you to create music

3. What is good enough to compete with real musicians

As someone (Guy?) pointed out on these forums, nearly every VI in the conversations we have on this forum are good enough to pass benchmark one. I mean EWHO is good enough to pass benchmark one and that's by no means a particularly impressive orchestra anymore. So saying "It's good enough for my director" is not very meaningful. Likewise for the reasons discussed, I think benchmark 3 is out of reach of every single library we talk about on these forums. I think there is a lot of "fooling ourselves" where we would like to believe a library is as good as the real thing. I do a lot of very harsh A/B comparisons (I mock up real orchestral pieces with reference to the original recordings) and even my mockups that seem to please people here feel very flawed to me. I even hear lots of unrealities in Andy's demos for SF libraries which is not to say they're not terrific demos, I'm just saying they would sound even more stunning with a real orchestra (he knows his craft!!). So in the end it comes down to the second benchmark. *What is good enough to inspire you to write.* If it's good enough for you, then it's good enough for you! I think the blind test is useful as a way of taking the sample library names, developers, prestige, etc factor out of it and just listening to sound. If you listen to a sound and say "I wish I had that as a VI" like @tack did, then that's an inspiring sound _for you_.  In retrospect I should have asked you all to name which sounds you wanted to have the most, instead of "What sounds fake/real."


----------



## Vastman (Dec 9, 2016)

I really did love the blind test NoamL... great idea... I am in no position to quibble with anything you said but I do agree wholeheartedly it's what inspires you to create compelling music which is most important. I think it's why something like the Bohemian Violin blew people away so much... no twiddling of dials, fumbling with keyswitches, meticulous editing post laydown, etc... all of which I hate and truly gets in the way of inspirational creativity. I could just sit down and play...

We are in an amazing moment when such tools come into the hands of songwriters and composers...


----------



## robgb (Dec 9, 2016)

NoamL said:


> In other words the "tone" and the "playability" can be there till the cows come home but it doesn't matter because the MUSICALITY is missing


 I don't think it's a matter of the musicality missing at all. The musicality comes from US, not the tools we use. 

A guitar in the hands of an infant isn't musical at all. In the hands of Jeff Beck it's a symphony.

A real violin in the hands of a neophyte sounds stiff and horrible, while a sample violin can sound extremely musical (and yes, almost real) in the hands of a seasoned musician. I think the blind test pretty much proved that.

Samples are tools that approximate the sounds of instruments. Some do a better job than others. Some do that job so well that entire television series are scored with them, and I'd argue that they sound pretty musical. This isn't the 1990's when samples were laughably bad. We've come a long, long way, and they are good enough now and playable enough for us to be very musical with them, and they are successfully competing with real instruments/players every day of the week.

So, with all due respect, I think your GPS analogy misses the mark. The average person off the street can tell the difference between a GPS voice and a human voice. The average person can not tell the difference between a real orchestra and a sampled one. 

I suppose it comes down to who are you writing for and what, exactly, are you attempting to accomplish? If you hope to create a perfect, flawless representation of a real orchestra, you will probably not succeed. But if you're talented enough, you may very well come close.


----------



## muk (Dec 9, 2016)

erikradbo said:


> 8. Hard to tell with only high notes, but sounds really good.



Well thank you.


----------



## Parsifal666 (Dec 9, 2016)

robgb said:


> I don't think it's a matter of the musicality missing at all. The musicality comes from US, not the tools we use.
> 
> A guitar in the hands of an infant isn't musical at all. In the hands of Jeff Beck it's a symphony.



Is it okay to +1,000,000 for this statement, even just for mentioning Jeff Beck?


----------



## robgb (Dec 9, 2016)

Vastman said:


> I think it's why something like the Bohemian Violin blew people away so much... no twiddling of dials, fumbling with keyswitches, meticulous editing post laydown, etc... all of which I hate and truly gets in the way of inspirational creativity. I could just sit down and play...


It's funny how different people can be. I recently heard a quite successful soundtrack artist say that he considers midi tools and mixers his paint brushes and the real creativity begins AFTER he lays down the tracks and begins fiddling with the dials. I agree with him to some extent and love to tweak after the recording is done. Some amazing things have grown out of it.


----------



## DSmolken (Dec 9, 2016)

NoamL said:


> This discussion reminds me of those GPS voice apps. That's a kind of sampling, isn't it?
> 
> _*Take the*_ _second_ exit on the *RIGHT* hand side.... you will arrive at your destination at *TWO. FORTY-TWO.* _p. m._


Off topic, but fun fact: voice synthesis is much, much older than instrument sampling.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolfgang_von_Kempelen's_Speaking_Machine


----------



## erikradbo (Dec 9, 2016)

Melodioso said:


> Reading this post, I am having one minute of silence for all the developers who spent an incredible amount of time to create these VIs... that got totally destroyed in 5 minutes. Ouch.



Well, I think they can handle one guys opinion of a specific recording (and if not and I were them I, would rest comfortably seeing that guy pinpointing real violins as "sounding very VI").


----------



## LondonMike (Dec 9, 2016)

NoamL said:


> This discussion reminds me of those GPS voice apps. That's a kind of sampling, isn't it?
> 
> _*Take the*_ _second_ exit on the *RIGHT* hand side.... you will arrive at your destination at *TWO. FORTY-TWO.* _p. m._
> 
> ...




I don't think you'd find many musicians who would claim even the best libraries are in the same ball park as a real thing. However, once a real instrument is recorded and played back via speakers it is also an abstraction. It is far from the same as hearing it played live, in the room, hall, space.

Take an acoustic piano. Bash away on an old upright or a concert grand and feel the whole body vibrate, resonate. Everytime you play a middle C it's ever so slightly different from the last. Midi, after all can only divide into 128 gradations of velocity. And I doubt many instruments have 128 velocity layers! Even if they did, it's not just velocity that counts, it's what overtones are ringing from the the notes you played in the previous measure etc. How can you sample that?

However, music is about context and in the right setting, a good sample can fool anyone. As the man said though, "you can fool all the people some of the time and some of the people all the time, but you can't fool all the people, all the time.


----------



## NoamL (Dec 9, 2016)

robgb said:


> The musicality comes from US, not the tools we use.



LOL what does that even mean? Respectfully, I can't read that as anything more than a glib catchphrase that ignores how sampled VIs actually work.

Picture a series of spiccato notes. What controls do YOU the midi-manipulator have over the performance? Well:

1. the velocity layer of each note

and... uh.... not much else. You can use Kontakt TM to fiddle the note lengths within reason. You can use humanization or a fluid click track to make it feel less robotic. You can be super anal-retentive and pick the notes roundrobin by roundrobin, I suppose. Anything else? With a typical Kontakt library, no.

Let's not get delusions of grandeur here, when you send a MIDI message, it triggers a sample playback. Musicality comes from _*musicians*_. That's why sample libraries need round robins & velocity layers. If the library doesn't capture a broad spectrum of musical "intents" there is no way for you to simulate them at the keyboard. Good luck making a library play more and less intensely when it has sampled one velocity layer.

Of course a good VI composer doesn't just expect a VI to do the work for him. There's a lot of MIDI massaging in a good mockup to get the transitions to sound right and to get a sequence of notes to at least feel _close_ to "a musician saying something" instead of just a series of triggered samples.

If by *"musicality" *you mean things like: the composition, the mix, the orchestration, the balance of instruments, then sure, a VI composer has total control over those elements.

But if you mean musicality the way my post used that word, meaning _*the feeling of musical intent behind a series of notes*_, that is at least partially _out of our control as VI Composers. _

Going back to the series of spiccato notes. If the developer successfully sampled the notes such that a series of them gives the impression of the bow bouncing on the string, then it will work. If they didn't, it won't. Period.

Compare it to an editor saying he "creates the actor's performance." Sure an editor can cobble together takes to create a single performance the actor never performed. But if the raw material is not there on film, the editor cannot create it.


----------



## Baron Greuner (Dec 9, 2016)

That's the thing about sample libraries. What people might want to do is to create something that sounds good with a good coherent structure, regardless of genre. Instead of worrying if it sounds like real players because it's never going to do that. It shouldn't really be compared to that and it should just sound good in its own right. Different.
Too much emphasis is put on sounding real. That's always been a load of nonsense. But it can still sound really good if it has good musicality.


----------



## LondonMike (Dec 9, 2016)

Baron Greuner said:


> That's the thing about sample libraries. What people might want to do is to create something that sounds good with a good coherent structure, regardless of genre. Instead of worrying if it sounds like real players because it's never going to do that. It shouldn't really be compared to that and it should just sound good in its own right. Different.
> Too much emphasis is put on sounding real. That's always been a load of nonsense. But it can still sound really good if it has good musicality.


There's real and then there's real _enough_! Let's face it, unless it's a world premiere of your latest symphony, real enough will do!! Haha!


----------



## NoamL (Dec 9, 2016)

You're right Baron, musicality and realism are distinct as well. 

There is something very affective and language-like about music, at least I feel so. You can't decode music into meanings, but... you feel as if there's some kind of communication going on. Am I off base with this? That element is what I'm calling "musicality."


----------



## Rob (Dec 9, 2016)

I find threads like this are an opportunity to know something about the people behind the comments... very interesting... just a reflection, it's late here


----------



## robgb (Dec 9, 2016)

NoamL said:


> Picture a series of spiccato notes. What controls do YOU the midi-manipulator have over the performance? Well:


 Velocity, timing, pitch, melody, speed, and how those all work in harmony with other instruments. If you use key switches, your choice of articulations comes into play as well. 

What do you have with a piano? You can play soft or loud, play a long note or a short note, play fast or slow, choose between a short scale of notes... other than that, what do you have? What makes one pianist better than another? His or her skill as a musician. His or her MUSICALITY.

Sample libraries are tools no different than real instruments, with their own strengths and limitations. And the quality of what's produced comes down to the musician and his or her ability to play the instrument.

I can't believe I even have to say that.


----------



## NoamL (Dec 9, 2016)

Both of us feeling that we "can't believe we even have to explain" stuff to the other is a clear sign that we're talking at cross purposes.

My question was asking you what parameters you have available, to control the performance of single notes in a passage of repeated spiccatos._ A passage that a composer_ _has already written_ and he/she is now handing to you. You keep insisting that mockup artists are analogous to musicians so I have constructed a scenario that's analogous. The composer hands music to musicians on the recording stage and asks them to turn in a musical performance. Likewise, he just handed you - the mockup artist - a page of spiccato notes and is asking you to "make this sound musical."

The musicians have full control over their instruments. What do _you_ have control over?

You replied by talking about a bunch of compositional elements like how long notes are, what pitch they are, what the tempo is, what melody the notes outline, and how the part harmonizes with other parts - all of these elements are determined by the composer, not you. So it does seem we are talking past each other.

When it comes to _controlling_ a performance of spiccato notes that has been _compositionally determined_, my argument is the main *parameterizable controls* a mockup artist can control are velocity, and maybe artificially twiddling the length of the recordings.

I think it goes without saying that you have far LESS control over your "instrument" than a musician does. They can make their instrument speak with a near infinite spectrum of nuances. You can control a velocity layer.


----------



## NoamL (Dec 9, 2016)

Btw stepping into your shoes for a moment, I think perhaps the better argument against my argument would be

"If you could control a VI as comprehensively as a violin, and with as much true nuance as a violin, and with all the acoustical properties of a violin, it would _be_ a violin. Why bother completely virtualizing a violin especially considering the control surfaces of a violin are so much better designed than the MIDI protocol? The level of sound-control you're asking for seems both unachievable and impractical! Don't you have ridiculously unrealistic expectations of how controllable VIs should be?"

which is entirely fair, but leads to my other argument - indeed, why bother? When you can hire a professional violinist pretty cheaply? Let musicians be musicians! Let composers be composers!


----------



## robgb (Dec 9, 2016)

NoamL said:


> Both of us feeling that we "can't believe we even have to explain" stuff to the other is a clear sign that we're talking at cross purposes.



Sorry. I'm a composer. I think in terms of composing in conjunction with performance. Despite this, my answer is the same. Sample libraries are a tool. As a performer, you deal with them as you would any musical instrument. You understand the strengths and limitations and you make choices. And if the phrase is nothing but spiccato notes, you have to deal with that. But you'd have limitations with any instrument playing such a phrase.

Why does it need to be any more complicated than that?


----------



## NoamL (Dec 9, 2016)

robgb said:


> Why does it need to be any more complicated than that?



because a musical note is more than X pitch with Y articulation for Z duration.

MIDI just a parametrization of music... A really reductive one. To be honest working with MIDI is more like writing software code than performing an instrument... when I'm looking at a piano roll, how is that different than those little metal sheets that used to go in music boxes?

I might spend 2 minutes picking exactly the right velocity for a note so it feels like it's part of a phrase, but in the end I'm at the mercy of the velocity layers that were recorded in the VI. I'm picking a variable from an array.


----------



## robgb (Dec 9, 2016)

Insert eye roll here. Just play with your heart using the tools you have. That's all that matters.


----------



## re-peat (Dec 10, 2016)

robgb said:


> Sample libraries are a tool. As a performer, you deal with them as you would any musical instrument.



That’s where I believe you’re wrong, Rob (gb). You can’t deal with sampled instruments _as you would any musical instrument_. Not if you use them as simulations of the real thing anyway. Basically, because sampled instruments pretend to be something which they're not. And they do so very clumsily and unconvincingly.

For starters, an awful lot of what, with real instruments, belongs to the domain of the performer’s choices and preferences, has, in the case of their sampled or modeled counterparts, already been decided upon by another party: the developer. And we’re talking all-important, performance-defining choices and preferences which no right-minded and self-respecting performer would ever want to hand out to someone else. But with virtual instruments, we’re obliged to.

Furthermore, since the simulation aspect and pretense looms so big over our work with virtual instruments, we’re constantly forced to resort to trickery and techniques — several of which not even strictly musical ones — which a player of real instruments (or someone who doesn’t use samples to emulate other instruments with) never ever has to consider: how to mask the inauthenticity of the whole thing.

Thirdly, sampled or modeled versions of real instruments can only do a tiny fraction — I don’t think that, in the case of sampled string- and wind instruments, it even amounts to 0,3 % — of what the real things can do.
We already consider it a luxury if a sample library has 8 round-robins and 6 velocity layers, and we praise and thank the developer for such generous degree of detail. With real instruments however … well, surely, I don’t have to finish this sentence, do I?
(And that’s just two of countless other musical factors which, in virtual instruments, are doomed to remain bewilderingly and frustratingly under-addressed. Not to mention the fact that something silly like ‘round robins’ is already an inept pseudo-solution, the kind of artificiality that is completely absent when playing a real instrument.)

In short: the list of things you _can’t_ do with sampled instruments (in their capacity as impostors, I mean) and musical decisions you _can’t_ make (because they were already made by the developer, or because the option to make them is unavailable) is sooooo long and has so many profound implications on the music-making with these tools, that it renders the phrase ‘just play with your heart’, even if it glows with admirable positivism, to make very little, if any, musical sense at all.

_


----------



## Rob (Dec 10, 2016)

This discussion has obviously become pointless... it seems there's no way to understand each other.


----------



## Lotias (Dec 10, 2016)

re-peat said:


> That’s where I believe you’re wrong, Rob (gb). You can’t deal with sampled instruments _as you would any musical instrument_. Not if you use them as simulations of the real thing anyway. Basically, because sampled instruments pretend to be something which they're not. And they do so very clumsily and unconvincingly.
> 
> For starters, an awful lot of what, with real instruments, belongs to the domain of the performer’s choices and preferences, has, in the case of their sampled or modeled counterparts, already been decided upon by another party: the developer. And we’re talking all-important, performance-defining choices and preferences which no right-minded and self-respecting performer would ever want to hand out to someone else. But with virtual instruments, we’re obliged to.
> 
> ...


And yet there are also things you can do with samples that you can't do with the real instrument (the list of _that_ is also extensive...), with extreme preciseness, mind you.

Round robins and velocity layers seem to work fine for what they're intended to do in the first place (pseudo-solution? what?). The real issue has always been legato and tone for the last several years, which can still be done to some extent - some instruments are especially impressive regarding that (Sample Modelling brass comes to mind).

This argument is silly. Real instruments and virtual instruments have their own limitations, and let's not act like that makes either of them less valid.


----------



## re-peat (Dec 10, 2016)

*And yet there are also things you can do with samples that you can't do with the real instrument.*

Not if you’re attempting to have a virtual instrument pretend it’s a real one, there aren’t. That’s the time when a real instrument can always safely say, and rightly so: “Anything you can do, I can do better.”

*Round robins and velocity layers seem to work fine for what they're intended to do in the first place*

I fear what you call ‘working fine’ is not how I would call it, Lotias. Either that, or maybe you just don’t care enough. And legato or tone are no more an issue now, or ever, than countless other aspects of a musical performance which, as I said, have to remain ignored or unattended because of the inadequacies and fakeness of the simulated instrumentarium.

*This argument is silly.*

The argument as such isn’t silly. What is silly is people expecting ‘realism’ from their samples, reverbs and virtual whathaveyounots.

*Real instruments and virtual instruments have their own limitations, and let's not act like that makes either of them less valid.*

Sure, real instruments have their limitations. The opening fanfare of “Star Wars” performed on 4 xylophones and 2 ocarina’s is not going to have quite the same impact as that music has in its original orchestration.
But that’s not what we’re discussing here. I’m not frustrated by the limitations of, say, a sampled bassoon or a modelled clarinet as such. Not at all. The frustration only sets in the moment these instruments are instructed to pretend they're real. And it’s the many limitations of that absurd pretense which is exclusive to virtual instruments, and completely absent in real instruments.

And your deduction that I consider real (acoustic) instruments ‘more valid’ than virtual ones is only partially correct. I make lots of music for which I have no need for real instruments whatsoever, music for which virtual instruments, samples and synths are the much better and far more creative choice.
I only dismiss virtual resolutely as totally and utterly inferior — in every single one of its musical aspects — as soon as it comes sailing through the air, presumptuously expecting to be mistaken for something which it is not.

_


----------



## robgb (Dec 10, 2016)

I have no problem using sample instruments. I treat them exactly as I would any instrument I play. Whether or not the music I produce satisfies anyone else is far less important than if it satisfies me.

It seems to me that if sample libraries are such a burden to some people, you should perhaps consider abandoning them and using the real thing. In the meantime, I'll continue to use and enjoy the small piece of realism that sample libraries afford me and will appreciate and thank all the people who have worked many hours to make that possible.

Honestly, the ability to make music comes down to you. You use the tools that work for you and abandon the rest. It's nice to have choices, isn't it?


----------



## Gzu (Dec 10, 2016)

Hello everyone.

I've been playing with Sm violin, and I have mix feelings about this.
While the up register sounds very good, almost real, the bottom registers aren't that good.
Mainly because the body resonance when G string is played sounds too artificial, even the transitions.


----------



## dgburns (Dec 10, 2016)

What excites me about the Sample Modelling approach is that it can compliment the old "sample based" approach. I play violin/viola/cello, and look forward to buying these SM strings. I tend to agree with the detractors, @re-peat @Baron Greuner and all the others on sound. But this is a step into a new way of getting ideas into the computer, there's bound to be improvements as we go forward.

Trying to play in all the parts using the real instruments is a big matter of time and accoustic space quality. I don't always have the time, and frankly sometimes I'll spend an afternoon playing in a section of strings, and while the result is good, it takes an awefull lot of energy. Maybe energy better spent conceptualizing the rest of the score given the time I have to review date. And sometimes the "klang" is fighting you, the instrument not quite up to optimal for some reason or other, or you just plain don't like the sound.

For me, the question is whether I can use this NOW to improve my work, and I feel the answer is yes. Mostly, the fact that I can move away from the articulation keys and focus on the performance while playing stuff into the daw using playing techniques that allow me to play stuff I would have a hard time achieving with samples, any samples. Obviously, if it sounds bad or not convincing, I'd go looking for another way of getting the idea across.

So far I have the saxes and the brass, and I find myself being able to write big band stuff and period brass (with mutes) in a way I just wouldn't attempt with the libs I previously had. Especially the way these things can go from soft to loud without any crossfades, that's fooling alot of people into thinking these parts I played in are real, or more convincing. The skill of the programmer is important, and the massaging of ALL the available controllers is vital, as is the ability to mimic the way the real thing is played.

I bought the SM brass at the same time as I got Project Sam Swing. Swing has some nice things, but the brass mostly sits unused alongside the SM brass. In my template (for this show) I've got three trumpets, four bones plus bass, four horns and tuba and yes, it takes time to blow out all the parts to each player, but it sounds pretty good to me. 

One last point, I've found that I use SM brass stuff to bring out the closer sound even when I'm making alot of noise with the bigger ensembles, and they blend well and bring out a midrange definition that the bigger ensembles sometimes lose in context. The bigger brass libs tend to have this huge bottom end that blooms in the room in a way SM just won't do, but arranging sections using the strengths of each can get good results. I don't want to try and convince anyone else what is good and what blows, but I've found an improvement using these SM things that makes me feel good about using them.

I have an upcoming medieval show and plan to use smaller sections, where the SM stuff will figure prominently. 

Peace brothers and sisters, don't fight about the small things that make us all unhappy. Make the best music you can with what you have.

David


----------



## re-peat (Dec 10, 2016)

David,

I actually bought — in robust health and with full presence of mind — the SM Violin within hours of it being released. And I have most everything else they released as well (except the Viola and the Cello). Only to say that I certainly don’t want to detract or discourage anyone from investigating the Sample Modeling catalog. Quite the contrary. Brilliant stuff (although I still consider their maiden release, ‘The Trumpet’, to be their crowning achievement, unsurpassed by anything which followed it).

As for the Violin: I’m not too wild about its timbre, but the reason I bought it is the one thing at which all SM instruments excel: that ability of theirs to ‘become one with the phrase’. Invaluable and something which samples only give if you’re lucky and even then only fragmentarily.

To stop any remaining doubts about whether the Baron and myself share the same body or not: I absolutely do not like the Bohemian (which appears to be a Greuner favourite). I don’t like how it sounds and I don’t like how it carries (or fails to carry) music. 

It is highly unlikely that I’d ever use the SM Violin without support from a matching sample library for the moments when the timbre really needs to be there, but for all those other times during a mock-violin performance when accuracy of articulation and/or expression is, to me, as important as timbre, I’m sure this SM Violin is going to prove itself a uniquely inspirational instrument.

_


----------



## Parsifal666 (Dec 10, 2016)

Sometimes there's an instrument that comes along which so completely fits (or is malleably-friendly toward) my music that I can't say it's the "be all and end all" for great libraries. It just is for me.

The Hein Solo Violin and Orchestral Woodwinds, Hollywood Strings and Brass, Albions Legacy to 4, Zebra...all provide me with such inspiration, plus the sound at times seems as though it was made for my music alone.

To me, the library that satisfies the above is the be all and end all..._*for*_ me.  Such things as "blind test-approved" "authenticity" and "oh dear, what did the reviewers say" take second places in my figuring.

But that's just me, personally I hope everyone here finds such instruments...the ones that both move you to write and delight you on a consistent basis with their wonderful fit.

I wish all of you your most inspired days ahead!


----------



## reids (Dec 10, 2016)

Gzu said:


> Hello everyone.
> 
> I've been playing with Sm violin, and I have mix feelings about this.
> While the up register sounds very good, almost real, the bottom registers aren't that good.
> Mainly because the body resonance when G string is played sounds too artificial, even the transitions.



Do you guys feel that the SM Viola is still suffering from tone/timbre issues that many of you pointed out to be an issue with the Violin after the updates? What are your thoughts on SM Viola's tone compared to SM Violin's tone to their emulated instruments?


----------



## ctsai89 (Dec 10, 2016)

reids said:


> Do you guys feel that the SM Viola is still suffering from tone/timbre issues that many of you pointed out to be an issue with the Violin after the updates? What are your thoughts on SM Viola's tone compared to SM Violin's tone to their emulated instruments?



their demoes sound fine to me. Viola's does have that kind of tone.


----------



## pmcrockett (Dec 10, 2016)

reids said:


> Do you guys feel that the SM Viola is still suffering from tone/timbre issues that many of you pointed out to be an issue with the Violin after the updates? What are your thoughts on SM Viola's tone compared to SM Violin's tone to their emulated instruments?


After the update they released for the viola a few months back, its tone with respect to its real-life counterpart is similar to that of the SM violin, and most of the criticisms made of the violin in this thread were also made of the viola and the cello when they were released. There are a couple more tweakable parameters on the violin as compared with the viola, though.


----------



## robgb (Dec 10, 2016)

reids said:


> Do you guys feel that the SM Viola is still suffering from tone/timbre issues that many of you pointed out to be an issue with the Violin after the updates? What are your thoughts on SM Viola's tone compared to SM Violin's tone to their emulated instruments?


The Viola's tone improved after the update. I imagine there will be some tweaking of the violin as well. That said, I think both sound great. Certainly far better than I expected. I, frankly, don't agree with the criticism.


----------



## reids (Dec 10, 2016)

NoamL said:


> Results!
> 
> 
> 
> ...




For this blind test, I feel it would have been best to test real live violins and VI violins to the same melody composition for a fair assessment. In the first demo (real live), the delicate vibrato resonating from the violin can not even be done decently on some of the VI. Furthermore, there was so much variation and difference in the playing style/articulations from each different demo to demo it was difficult to listen overall. Game of Thrones is such a familiar universally recognized theme that many people have a subconscious reaction to the melody and the strings to judge that it is real because it was performed well and invoked the same feeling as when they were watching the show. They know how the strings should sound like because they've heard it countless times to measure up from the original on whether it is on the same level or not. This blind test would have been best utilized against using the same composition such as Game of Thrones theme to see if people still reacted the same way moving from each violin/VI to the next. It would make it easier to hear the strengths and weaknesses on each example of the same composition to fairly judge. I would argue that sometimes "sounding" realistic isn't always "sounding" the best, but it is the holy grail that is very difficult to achieve.


----------



## LHall (Dec 11, 2016)

For me, the ultimate test isn't whether I can fool someone. I've fooled plenty of top pro musicians, so that's not even an issue. The thing for me is: "do I ENJOY making MUSIC with this instrument?". 

I used to be very frustrated doing "mockups" and such because the tools available at the time never felt musical to me. Let's all assume that no virtual instrument is equal to watching people live in person. But with SM instruments - all of which I own and use every day - I feel like I'm watching a scene in hi-def 3-D big screen video. With the older instruments, or even new instruments that depend on endless keyswitching, I feel like instead I'm looking at a big collection of nice pictures that someone has tried to place in order into a scene. 

Using the SM instruments (and LASS btw), I feel the joy of playing music when I use them rather than feeling like I'm "constructing" something out of bits and pieces.


----------



## robharvey (Dec 12, 2016)

For me, I find I get inspired by sounds. Modern film, TV and audiobooks can become all about the type of sound creating a feeling as well as the composition. If the sound samples are of good quality and has a certain level of expression built in, I'll always find I get more milage out of it over something else.


----------



## Lee Blaske (Dec 14, 2016)

Here's a little example of the new SampleModeling violin integrated into an instrumental country tune...

https://www.reverbnation.com/leeblaske/song/27151150-headin-home-for-christmas


----------



## brunodegazio (Dec 20, 2016)

Just picked up the SM Violin and I thought I would try it out with this old musical pot-boiler, the Novacek Perpetuum Mobile. It's a one-trick pony sort of piece, an exercise in cross-string bowing, which is a technique that is hard to pull off with samples. The intelligent modelling of string resonance and ringing in SM's violin improves the simulation a lot.


----------



## Rob Elliott (Dec 20, 2016)

I agree - this is they kind of material SM does the best at. Not super happy with it's emotive range but this cross bowing is what its best at. The lower range in this style takes me out of it a bit - but overall quite good.


----------



## byzantium (Dec 20, 2016)

Geez this is impressive. How did you enter the midi? Sounds like lots of editing would be needed to get that level of variance.


----------



## NYC Composer (Dec 20, 2016)

Sounds like a job for Signor Paganini (mostly)!

I only used the Signor Paganini violin for one project, but for 15 bucks it was the most fun I've had per dollar in quite a while.

I'll be a purchaser of all the SM strings eventually (as I am of most of their instruments) because of the startling and satisfying control they give me. The sound may not be perfect, but it's a balance that I'm comfortable with.


----------



## brunodegazio (Dec 20, 2016)

byzantium said:


> Geez this is impressive. How did you enter the midi? Sounds like lots of editing would be needed to get that level of variance.



Played the violin part at 1/2 speed with an EWI, then followed up with the usual cleanup and editing. 
The piano part was entered with the mouse.


----------



## jemu999 (Dec 20, 2016)

brunodegazio said:


> Just picked up the SM Violin and I thought I would try it out with this old musical pot-boiler, the Novacek Perpetuum Mobile. It's a one-trick pony sort of piece, an exercise in cross-string bowing, which is a technique that is hard to pull off with samples. The intelligent modelling of string resonance and ringing in SM's violin improves the simulation a lot.




Could never mock-up anything close to that with any other vst library out there at this time. Sounds great. As always, every library has its strengths. Nice work Bruno.


----------



## Inceptic (Dec 29, 2016)

Has anyone tried layering sampled solo violin libraries with this modeled VI?


----------



## Piano Pete (Jan 6, 2017)

Hello,

For those who have spent some time with SM's solo violin, or their viola and cello, how do you feel about the flexibility of the instrument? Where do you feel that this instrument shines the most, and how do you feel it compares to Chris Hein's instruments, Embertone, Orchestral Tools, or another equivalent library when it comes to versatility?

I am currently in the market for some solo strings, and from what I have found, there seems to be a decent amount of quality libraries. Unfortunately, I seem to be hesitant to purchase any one of them. From everything I have read on these forums and have listened to, I can see how the individual libraries could be suited towards one type of music or another. However, without getting behind the wheel to try them, I am finding it difficult to determine which one would be able to cover the most artistic ground. I am not necessarily asking which sounds the best, as I have my own opinions on that; instead, out of the solo string libraries available, which do you feel would be the most versatile? While it would be nice, I do not have the luxury of being able to purchase several solo violins, violas, or celli.


----------



## ctsai89 (Jan 6, 2017)

Inceptic said:


> Has anyone tried layering sampled solo violin libraries with this modeled VI?



why would you do that? 2 violins as an ensemble never works. Either just have a solo violin or at least 3 players of violin.


----------



## Lotias (Jan 6, 2017)

Piano Pete said:


> Hello,
> 
> For those who have spent some time with SM's solo violin, or their viola and cello, how do you feel about the flexibility of the instrument? Where do you feel that this instrument shines the most, and how do you feel it compares to Chris Hein's instruments, Embertone's, Berlin's, or another equivalent library when it comes to versatility?
> 
> I am currently in the market for some solo strings, and from what I have found, there seems to be a decent amount of quality libraries. Unfortunately, I seem to be hesitant to purchase any one of them. From everything I have read on these forums and have listened to, I can see how the individual libraries could be suited towards one type of music or another. However, without getting behind the wheel to try them, I am finding it difficult to determine which one would be able to cover the most artistic ground. I am not necessarily asking which sounds the best, as I have my own opinions on that; instead, out of the solo string libraries available, which do you feel would be the most versatile? While it would be nice, I do not have the luxury of being able to purchase several solo violins, violas, or celli.


If it's 'covering the most artistic ground' that's most important to you, then SampleModeling instruments have always been capable of playing pretty much anything you throw at it with any style you want, so long as you know how to 'play' the instrument, so to speak. There are a lot of parameters to deal with that go into the performance, much like the real instrument, and if you don't know what parts of the sound they effect it can get very confusing and you can end up with something extremely synthy sounding.


----------



## Joe_D (Jan 6, 2017)

Piano Pete said:


> ...SM's solo violin, or their viola and cello, how do you feel about the flexibility of the instrument?...how do you feel it compares to Chris Hein's instruments, Embertone, Orchestral Tools...when it comes to versatility?
> 
> I am currently in the market...there seems to be a decent amount of quality libraries...I am finding it difficult to determine which one would be able to cover the most artistic ground.....out of the solo string libraries available, which do you feel would be the most versatile?



I don't own Chris Hein's new solo string VI's so I can't directly compare them, but the truly modeled Samplemodeling/SWAM solo strings are by far the most versatile I have played _provided that you have excellent tone-shaping skills, genre and instrument specific taste, time to sculpt controllers, and know the "language" of the way string players shape notes and create phrases._

That's a pretty big "provided!" If you really don't have the skills and/or inclinations listed above, it might hard for you to get realistic results, since the only things baked in are an extremely wide palette of tone shaping controls. Skill, taste, and musicality are up to you to provide. It's a little like handing someone a violin; a great violinist will make it sound great, a mediocre one will make it sound mediocre, and a truck driver will make it sound like a jake brake (B-A-A-A-A-A-A-H!!!). But, of course, you don't have to work on the actual playing technique, only the shaping.

Other (sampled) libraries rely on the player to provide lots of the skill and taste, and then you string together bits of their performance into your line. 

The Bohemian line takes that concept extremely far, for instance, deciding many things for you. You just play, and it comes out (hopefully) musically, based on an analysis of your playing. Very cool, but not as versatile.

Other libraries are more at the midpoint of that continuum; you put a lot of effort into shaping the line, but the recorded player provides lots of the details and instrument-specific taste. My favorite "midpoint" library at the moment is Emotional Cello; it's pretty flexible and shape-able, but the recordings give you lots of convincing and musical details, and tons of options. 

On the "you shape it" side of the continuum are Embertone (very nice; I have them all, some versatility but not near Samplemodeling's IMO), and it seems Chris Hein (though, as I said, I haven't used Chris' solo strings).

It's up to you to think about your skills and inclinations and then decide which way to go. But I do think that Samplemodeling is the most versatile (_if you have the necessary skills/taste_); it offers control over so many specific tone-shaping parameters that nothing else that I have used can compare.


----------



## wabbit (Apr 9, 2017)

WOW! I think thats great! That's played on a EWI USB? What operating system are you using?


----------



## d.healey (Apr 10, 2017)

Rob Elliott said:


> The control and playability is unequaled - but something is screaming at me synthetic. It's like just the 'wrong person was used in the sampling session' (of course no sampling was done - just the way it sounds to my ears. it's missing some body me thinks) Is the control worth the timbre weakness? Maybe.
> 
> 
> edit: perhaps something demo'd (solo) played more evocatively would show me its full range (ala Hillary Hahn, etc.). no doubt a wonderful fiddle instrument.


Is this instrument not sampled then like their others?


----------



## DSmolken (Apr 10, 2017)

I think the strings use waveguide synthesis?


----------



## d.healey (Apr 10, 2017)

DSmolken said:


> I think the strings use waveguide synthesis?


Got a reference for this?


----------



## DSmolken (Apr 10, 2017)

Just this: http://vi-control.net/community/thr...sical-modeling-dead.59521/page-3#post-4052389


----------



## Frederick Russ (Apr 10, 2017)

Nice. I think it could possibly do great duty layering in violin ensemble mockups to add enhance random detail and immediacy. Hadn't tried it though - waiting to hear back from them.


----------



## d.healey (Apr 10, 2017)

DSmolken said:


> Just this: http://vi-control.net/community/thr...sical-modeling-dead.59521/page-3#post-4052389


Aha cool, thanks


----------



## brunoboisson (Oct 29, 2017)

robgb said:


> With the SM Violin, I feel as if we're arguing over whether or not the guy who painted a portrait of the President made his nose a little too big. Most people will look at the painting and see the President. And that's all that counts. The truth is, many of the people who responded to this little test thought the SM violin was real. Kudos to SM for fooling them. It's easy to spot a fake when you already know it's a fake.


Exactly!


----------

