• Register
  • Help
Page 1 of 6 1234 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 59

Topic: I think VSL needs to offer a VSTi version

Share/Bookmark
  1. #1

    I think VSL needs to offer a VSTi version

    I am absolutely, utterly torn between the fantasy image in my head of what EWQLSO will be like when it comes out, and VSL. One of the main turn-offs of VSL for me is having to deal with gigastudio, when it could be put in a VSTi like EWQLSO. Imagine opening VSL tidily in your sequencer, without any dangling applications like the performance tool (the alternations and interval stuff would be all dealt with tidily within the VSTi), and being able to put native plugins on the tracks or master... all on one computer!!! (Especially so now that logic has the freeze function, and cubase will surely follow closely behind)

    Now that we have seen that the VSL is not close-mic\'ed as I feared, and responds to reverb nicely, I\'m just so torn between these two libraries. The VSL\'s gorgeous woodwinds and brass where the notes \"swallow\" into the next (using the legato tool), is something that EWQLSO has not even set out to offer. Maybe the EWQLSO will manage to blur the transition a litle with the hall release samples, but I can\'t see them truly achieving the realism of VSL. But then, an orchestra in it\'s own hall is so incredibly apealing, and it\'s 2000 bucks cheaper (VSL final edition = $5000). GAWD I\'m really torn.

    Back to the real point: If VSL gets it\'s act together and produces a neat and tidy product in it\'s own disk streaming VSTi, ending the need for opening giga and dangling performance tool apps, that will probably be enough for me to stretch my VISA to its $5000 limit. And I\'ll have to just put up with the fact that I have to mix my own orchestra, instead of feeling like I\'m sitting infront of one (which seems to be the idea with EWQLSO)

    If EWQLSO does an incredible job of using \"old\" sample library philosophy of _no intervals_, and the overall sound is just that much fuller, warmer, more believable than VSL, then I will go with it and save $2000. And it mixes itself, which just RAWKS (to quote King).

    I don\'t mean to bore everyone with my personal purchasing decisions. I have exposed this because I reckon many people are in the same dilema. I think many people who are holding on to their money to get either one or the other will go with EWQLSO when it comes out, unless VSL offers a VSTi version.

    note: yes, there is a EXS24 version, but I\'m talking about a neat and tidy fusion of a streaming sampler (possibly Kontact) and the midi performance tools, not a mere format conversion.

    Opinions? (and no, I can\'t afford both:P)

  2. #2

    Re: I think VSL needs to offer a VSTi version

    By the way, will the PRO edition of the VSL simply add new instruments, or will it also add more articulations to instruments that are already in the first edition?

    I say this because the first edition may well be enough for those not needing fancy things like a cimbasso! But if the PRO edition actually adds more articulations to existing instruments, then its a harder choice.

  3. #3
    Senior Member Bruce A. Richardson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 1999
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Posts
    5,755

    Re: I think VSL needs to offer a VSTi version

    I would not let the platform dictate this decision. Buy the sound you want, and use whatever platform or tools are necessary to make that sound work.

  4. #4

    Re: I think VSL needs to offer a VSTi version

    A MAS ( I`m using DP3 ) for OS9 or
    AU version for OSX would be great
    for Mac users ! : )


    Veron

  5. #5

    Re: I think VSL needs to offer a VSTi version

    Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
    I would not let the platform dictate this decision. Buy the sound you want, and use whatever platform or tools are necessary to make that sound work.
    <font size=\"2\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">I don\'t completely agree with that statement. Of course, the sound quality and the feature set of a library is important. But the ease to use and the ergonomics of a tool is also a major factor, because it influence the productivity. Being able to work with a sound library as a VST-i, DX-i, AU, MAS or whatever instrument that integrate in the sequencer is a major plus over the standalone sampler, like giga. It is easier to setup (even if you are using Logic freeze function, or Steinberg VST-Link, to increase the capacity of the computer setup), and you get faster results, since you have access to all the sequencer capabilities.

    A lot of us really like the idea of everything integrated in the sequencer. Now that both Apple and Pinnacle offer their own way to increase the setup capacity, it is even more appealling. Personnally, I am waiting for the EWQLSO, partly because of the VST-i capabilities with the NI tools.

    Best Regards,
    Mart

  6. #6

    Re: I think VSL needs to offer a VSTi version

    Having your whole setup on one computer is very appealing. And dealing with specialized VSTi\'s (though power hungry) does seem preferable.

    Just my 2 cents.


    John

  7. #7
    Senior Member Bruce A. Richardson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 1999
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Posts
    5,755

    Re: I think VSL needs to offer a VSTi version

    Originally posted by johnhutch:
    Having your whole setup on one computer is very appealing. And dealing with specialized VSTi\'s (thought power hungry) does seem preferable.

    John
    <font size=\"2\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">That all depends on what you do in a day.

    Can you search a huge network for one wave file out of literally tens of thousands, and get your result in less than one second with a plugin sampler? Can you really leverage a full sampling load, then simultaneously open up sixteen tracks for recording live studio players?

    The scale of the solution is completely different.

    When you\'re talking about a really robust GigaStudio rig, you\'re probably talking about multiple networked machines lightpiped/wordclocked to the DAW or other master digital buss, and functioning as a much larger scale solution. Lately, MIDIoverLAN (the application and the concept) makes this an even more cohesive way to work.

    In other words, I think convenience is a very narrow and misleading argument. What is efficient at one scale of production may be horribly inefficient in another. In the above example, a network essentially functioning as a multi-machine DAW is a very efficient system itself, capable of a substantial volume of work.

    I\'m not saying plugin samplers and synths aren\'t great. I\'m saying that GigaStudio is a whole other brand of great on a completely different production scale. One must assume that folks like Hans Zimmer, who can work with anything they like, choose to work with GigaStudio because it offers them something meaningful at the scale of production they do.

    GigaStudio is a bona fide killer app, too, something very meaningful in the software world. GigaStudio shattered a barrier. People who loathe PCs purchase them to run it. It changed the way sampling is done, and even now, the plugin solutions are just enabling feature parity comparable to the Giga 2.0 spec. We have every reason to expect the 3.0 spec will be exponentially deeper on every level.

    Bottom line, judging GigaStudio against plugin solutions isn\'t truthful or transparent without taking a much larger picture into view, and weighing matters of sheer scale. For many users, myself included, the currently available plugin technology is not robust or efficient enough to warrant replacing networked GigaStudio systems.

    So, ironically, the efficiency and convenience is EXACTLY why I depend on GigaStudio. I\'ve got video streaming in my DAW, already. It has a lot to do, and everything has to stay fast, responsive, and ready for anything I need to do. I need overkill, and that means multiple machines and non-integrated solutions at this point in time. That\'s what keeps me in business and makes me able to stay ahead of my work. So there are two sides to the story...

  8. #8

    Re: I think VSL needs to offer a VSTi version

    \"Having your whole setup on one computer is very appealing. And dealing with specialized VSTi\'s (thought power hungry) does seem preferable.\"

    I\'d REALLY like to know in a real world situation if this is actually feasable. If one of you composer types can sequence one of your tv/movie cues and then mix, master all on one machine. From the info I\'ve gathered from this forum, alot of you have templates that are HUGE! Are we truely now able to do it all on just machine!!??

  9. #9

    Re: I think VSL needs to offer a VSTi version

    Originally posted by Leon Willett:

    Now that we have seen that the VSL is not close-mic\'ed as I feared, and responds to reverb nicely, I\'m just so torn between these two libraries. The VSL\'s gorgeous woodwinds and brass where the notes \"swallow\" into the next (using the legato tool), is something that EWQLSO has not even set out to offer. Maybe the EWQLSO will manage to blur the transition a litle with the hall release samples, but I can\'t see them truly achieving the realism of VSL.
    <font size=\"2\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">Nick did in fact say that smoothing of legato lines and creating the links between the notes would be provided in the library.

    Originally posted by Munsie:
    \"Having your whole setup on one computer is very appealing. And dealing with specialized VSTi\'s (thought power hungry) does seem preferable.\"

    I\'d REALLY like to know in a real world situation if this is actually feasable. If one of you composer types can sequence one of your tv/movie cues and then mix, master all on one machine. From the info I\'ve gathered from this forum, alot of you have templates that are HUGE! Are we truely now able to do it all on just machine!!??
    <font size=\"2\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">Probably only with Logic and the freeze tracks feature, but it all depends on how big you\'re orchestrations are and stuff as many are only using one machine to realise their orchestral pieces.

  10. #10

    Re: I think VSL needs to offer a VSTi version

    Bruce,

    I agree with you that convenience does have more to do with being able to best accomplish what you set out to do and having whatever you need to make that necessary.

    I guess I just wish that for those of us with more modest setups, who don\'t mind bouncing down a bit, they would incorporate a VSTi ability in Gigastudio.

    Just thinking out loud.

    John

Go Back to forum
Page 1 of 6 1234 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •