What's new

Orchestral Tools: Berlin Series on SINE now!

Apologies if you know this, but Logic Articulation sets allow you to output on different channels. You could keep each of the five groups of articulations per instrument on its own channel in your articulation set and in sine. Then all the arts of an instrument will be accessible on one track.
No need to apologize. I actually didn't know this. I've never worked in channels before. It seems simple enough on the surface, though it is annoying that all of the meters reflect any activity happening on any given channel.
 
I am not sure what you are getting at. I use articulation sets, but this doesn't keep me from having multiple tracks with BS.
You can do it if you use midi channels for each group, but I can't get Logic to send CCs reliably to omni (i.e., "any—it always reverts to a specific channel), so that means writing a script or finding one (there used to be some floating around the forum) to propagate the CCs across all the channels. Otherwise you end up with a very confusing CC situation when you switch from ord to trem, say, and end up switching back and forth between modulation for midi channel 1 and midi channel 2, for instance, rather than having the same CC sent to both channels. But if you can get the CCs to propagate, you can set each group into its own midi channel and then make the articulation sets address everything across midi channels.

I have an articulation set for the Kontakt version of BS that works that way and uses I think 5 midi channels. Babylon Waves has a Kontakt multiscript that takes care of getting the CCs across midi channels. That set up still has lots of issues, though, and I'm finding I prefer Sine with several tracks to Kontakt even though I can get it all onto one track in Kontakt. When I was working on a noodle last night I did it up using both the single track from Kontakt and with Sine and the whole process went much faster in Sine, even though I did the Sine version first. Moreover I had difficulty replicating the Sine version in Kontakt. I think I would have had to redo the Kontakt instruments so that the expressive long legato was in the same Capsule instance as the main legato and the soft legato (those were the articulations I was using). Programming the Capsule instances is just way more fussy than Sine, and Capsule just refused to do some things. Still finding workarounds for Capsule resulted in a plausibly better rendition, at least in this exposed setting. That's an interesting thing about workarounds—you sometimes stumble on a better solution.

Sine:

View attachment BS Noodle 1.1 Sine (NoVerb) 1.mp3

Kontakt:

View attachment BS Noodle 1.1 Kontakt (NoVerb).mp3

BS Violins 1 and 2 in octaves, violin 2 trimmed a bit under violin 1 using CC11. These are the tree mics out of the box with no other processing including no reverb. They are also programmed for contextual setting rather than being exposed like this, and the fourth note for the Sine version was originally programmed with a portamento, which I removed to make it conform to the Kontakt version. This resulted in a less than ideal legato transition that I didn't take time to fix, because I still want that interval to be portamento in the noodle I excerpted these from. Kontakt also has portamento available but it's rather hard to trigger properly with the Capsule legatos. The Kontakt version evidently has the CC11 pulled down too quickly at the end as well, resulting in a poor release.

One further point: I find the differences between these to be real but subtle, and also mostly within the range of programming, meaning skilled programming and mixing will make a larger difference with these libraries than will any differences in the libraries themselves. I also find the largest differences are in the workflow between Kontakt and Sine. And there I think Sine mostly comes out on top.

Still, I do feel like I'm fighting BS in Sine, that there are significant frictions to my workflow, and that it really wants to be used in a different way.
 
@jbuhler I already prefer the Sine version of BS to the Kontakt version--minus the bugs of course, though I trust most of those will be ironed out in time. Initially I set up my template with multiple instruments in the Sine player, but I am quickly deciding that maybe that isn't the right approach. I've just never used channels before because I never really saw the point. I am thinking now that I need to spread these out.

I have long since had difficulties with Logic and CC data, but I don't really know enough about what I am doing there to comment at present. I think that I am going to put each instrument on its own player with channels and see how that works. This is just all really new to me and very different to the way I have worked in the past. There is going to be a learning curve here, and I am likely not going to completely tackle it until articulation sets are released.
 
On another note, the new Sine woodwinds seem to have the same problem as Revive. They are just too quiet. A piccolo should be able to lead the orchestra around by the nose, but I can't even hear the piccolo in a thick mix. Guess I'm glad I have the Legacy version.
 
I also find the largest differences are in the workflow between Kontakt and Sine. And there I think Sine mostly comes out on top.
What do you find SINE does better? This is a point where I'd disagree with you - I know you are not a fan of Capsule, but I've never run into many issues with it (using it for years with BWW). It offers, as far as I have come across, the same functionality as SINE - plus things like true purging, easier layering, editing, etc. SINE has potential, but the current implementation does not capitalize on it.

I also find it a rather poor design decision that in SINE, they have tried to squeeze everything into a small box in the bottom right - when they have SO much negative and unused space throughout the interface.
 
@jbuhler I already prefer the Sine version of BS to the Kontakt version--minus the bugs of course, though I trust most of those will be ironed out in time. Initially I set up my template with multiple instruments in the Sine player, but I am quickly deciding that maybe that isn't the right approach. I've just never used channels before because I never really saw the point. I am thinking now that I need to spread these out.

I have long since had difficulties with Logic and CC data, but I don't really know enough about what I am doing there to comment at present. I think that I am going to put each instrument on its own player with channels and see how that works. This is just all really new to me and very different to the way I have worked in the past. There is going to be a learning curve here, and I am likely not going to completely tackle it until articulation sets are released.
Have you set up articulation sets yet? If not, I have really basic sets for the longs and shorts group with some additional legatos of each string section as well as the Sine presets that correspond to those. I'm happy to send those along.
 
What do you find SINE does better? This is a point where I'd disagree with you - I know you are not a fan of Capsule, but I've never run into many issues with it (using it for years with BWW). It offers, as far as I have come across, the same functionality as SINE - plus things like true purging, easier layering, editing, etc. SINE has potential, but the current implementation does not capitalize on it.

I also find it a rather poor design decision that in SINE, they have tried to squeeze everything into a small box in the bottom right - when they have SO much negative and unused space throughout the interface.
Idk man I'm going through some of the new BST patches and they sound so good. So much more focused. I even like the Serial Spiccato, which I pretty much avoided completely in kontakt

I totally agree with the use of space though. I hope they bring in more features to fill it out.
 
Last edited:
Idk man I'm going through some of the new BST patches and they sound so good. So much more focused. I even like the Serial Spiccato, which I pretty much avoided completely in kontakt

I totally agree with the use of space though. I hope they bring in more features to fill it out.
That's due to sample cleanup / scripting improvements, which is great - but from a workflow standpoint, I'm wondering what SINE does that much better than Capsule?
 
Have you set up articulation sets yet? If not, I have really basic sets for the longs and shorts group with some additional legatos of each string section as well as the Sine presets that correspond to those. I'm happy to send those along.
I'm going to put your name in for beatification. I would be delighted to receive anything you've put together. composer at jetthitt.com would probably be the simplest, unless there is a more appropriate way.
 
What do you find SINE does better? This is a point where I'd disagree with you - I know you are not a fan of Capsule, but I've never run into many issues with it (using it for years with BWW). It offers, as far as I have come across, the same functionality as SINE - plus things like true purging, easier layering, editing, etc. SINE has potential, but the current implementation does not capitalize on it.

I also find it a rather poor design decision that in SINE, they have tried to squeeze everything into a small box in the bottom right - when they have SO much negative and unused space throughout the interface.
I'm still puzzling that out, tbh. It's very much a feel at the moment. But I do find that everything takes me much longer to program in Capsule, and I get lots of misfires when I program it that requires continually going back over and editing the midi. I have few of those issues with the Sine version.

That said, I agree with you completely about many of the poor design choices with Sine. Yes, putting all that basic functionality into a little box is kind of ridiculous. Not quite as ridiculous as putting all that functionality for Capsule in the little wrench, but bordering on it. And as I have noted in other posts, Sine suffers from confusing simplicity and rigidity. (Another bit of philosophy they ported to Sine.) A lot of the Sine implementation is just too rigid. Polymap makes little sense without a lock function and without the ability to merge articulations across groups (and really it should be able to do this across instruments). The purge implementation is nonsensical. The speed and velocity parameters for the adaptive legato ought to be user modifiable, and barring that OT should at least tell us the values at which they are triggered. The library tab is growing increasingly unruly as I acquire more Sine instruments. The default for saving instrument sets can't be changed so you have to navigate to the right place every time. The option tab gives CC commands that are not explained in the manual. The manual in general is woefully incomplete. I could go on.

But Sine still works much better for me on every library I've tried. BS has been the most difficult Sine library by far, but even that one is working much better for me—though I still don't think I'll be able to use BS as my main string library unless I can figure out a way to make a reduced articulation version that isn't overly clumsy to implement. I do feel though I will be able to use the Sine version regularly in a way that hasn't been the case for the Kontakt version.
 
That's due to sample cleanup / scripting improvements, which is great - but from a workflow standpoint, I'm wondering what SINE does that much better than Capsule?
It does fast simple custom stuff way better. So say you have a quick combo where you want to blend 4 combinations of elements on different channels, that's really fast.

It really struggles when you try to do deeper level stuff. I've tried brute forcing some of my custom patches from kontakt and it really takes forever and it's super finicky still. I doubt it'll stay that way forever though since they tend to attract more of a "power user" customer
 
What do you find SINE does better? This is a point where I'd disagree with you - I know you are not a fan of Capsule, but I've never run into many issues with it (using it for years with BWW). It offers, as far as I have come across, the same functionality as SINE - plus things like true purging, easier layering, editing, etc. SINE has potential, but the current implementation does not capitalize on it.

I also find it a rather poor design decision that in SINE, they have tried to squeeze everything into a small box in the bottom right - when they have SO much negative and unused space throughout the interface.
One thing SINE is doing way better here is i don't get hanging notes. With denser arrangements, Capsule had a lot of those.

I agree regarding negative space and that's not even the only design complaint I have with SINE. Actually i have many design complaints!
 
What are everyone's favorite mic settings so far? I'm just using Tree and Surround right now, but I'm trying to decide whether or not to add more and merge them together.
 
So AB, Tree, and Close? Or does AB replace Tree for you?
I keep the tree in. Close, AB, Tree, and Sur. It gives a nice balanced full sound imo. I might rebalance a little depending on context in a piece but i like that starting point. Those four also happen to be included in all OT libraries which of course affected my choice
 
I keep the tree in. Close, AB, Tree, and Sur. It gives a nice balanced full sound imo. I might rebalance a little depending on context in a piece but i like that starting point. Those four also happen to be included in all OT libraries which of course affected my choice
Did you merge them together?
 
Hi @A.Heppelmann ,

I'm going to watch your String Articulation Video tutorial on YT, where you are using BS (SINE) , I'm sure I will benefit from watching it, and learn some helpful tips. I would love it if you release more of these type of videos focused on Articulations, how to use them, which ones for what, and how they relate to each other in various musical phrasing scenarios. Plus, any tips and tricks related to using various articulations to enhance realism.

Thank You for making these videos. :thumbsup:

How do you like the SINE versions of Berlin Main Orch. so far ?

Cheers,
Muziksculp
 
Did you merge them together?
No. The SINE compression is pretty good so all four mics with a legato or two and two or three different types of shorts is only like two gigs of ram per instrument. I'm not that interested in mic merging. I'd rather have a proper purge option, but even that isn't at the top of the list of things i want OT to focus on
 
Top Bottom