tapper mike wrote:Sorry I didn't mean to ignore this post. I was posting while you were then hit reply later.
I agree and ....Different Violin, though properly edited and processed.
Violins are like guitars in that each one will sound uniquely different. Player strings, bowing motion, mic'ing will all effect the final outcome.
I have to disagree, though. I still hear it in the first 3, less so in the second, but it's clearly a very small problem, and for the most part, people should take what I say about it with a grain of salt.
I tend to use strings to help establish the rhythm in songs that don't use a lot of percussion.
Here is a funny story completely unrelated to soundware. I used to work for this very small chain (four stores) restaraunt that was part of a mega conglomerate. The parent company had it's hands in so many different fields it's hard to think straight. We used Tide to mop the floors. It was crap on quarry tile. One day we switched brands to something that was both cheaper and more effective. Hell rained down on us from above. Some VP (and we had hundreds of VP's) had made the decision that Tide had to be used everywhere by everyone forever. You may be familiar with the saying "You make your decisions then your decisions make you"
Well our little store didn't have the right to choose which detergent to mop our own stores floor with. Politics.
Politics may be why Roland developers had to use that particular violin sample over the multitudes of different violins and samples the world has to offer.
Homogenization may be the other. All brands have vested interest in brand identity. Yamaha's sound like yamaha's. Rolands sound like Rolands and Korgs sound like Korgs. Granted the quality within that frame work increases as the price increases. But no one wants'a roland that doesn't sound like a roland.
You are 100% right.
Basically, here's how the Hyper Canvas strings were made.
-Go to what I suspect is the Miroslav library and take some stereo violin and cello section samples, and map them according to the keyboard.
-Merge both stereo channels to make the sound mono.
-Remove about 1/3 of the multi-samples.
-Make the sample offset something crazy like 10,000.
-Set the attack and release envelopes a smidge upwards.
-EQ it, compress it accordingly.
-Add a tiny amount of lowpass filter and resonance.
Roland seems to be bedfellows with Miroslav.
And I believe the guys behind the SC88 Pro and Hyper Canvas, the Sound Canvases with that really terrible string patch (that's example #4 in the demo I gave you), thought that sound was brilliant because it mixed well, had less noticeable loop points, and came from the Miroslav library, as opposed to the other string sample that I don't believe did.
It could certainly be politics, and it can also be a matter of suggestion and opinion. "Oh, this is from the Miroslav library, so it must be better than the previous string sound we had!" - Even though it really isn't. That sort of thing.
It's also a matter of... okay: The string sound I like is actually the stock string sound on the Roland JV/XP/XV's.
They had this really awful loop point, though, in about the C4 range. It's unusable to me.
The funny thing is: This string sound is the same one used in the original SC88 and the newer SD-50, but on these synths, the sample is shorter, and so the loop point doesn't have the annoying bowing sound like in the bigger synths, and the sound is actually better for it
Just things like that. Generally flawed decision making, or decisions that just can't please everyone.