Miroslav Philharmonik vs earlier Vitous libraries

[Squids]

Michael, I really would appreciate you telling me what dealer told you this information. It is kind of important that we contact them and make sure that they know the facts. Keep in mind that ANY dealer of Miroslav's original libraries is now selling a product that I own the rights to. So, it would be really helpful to both them, myself and any other customer who talks to them for me to be able to contact them. Unless they specifically said to you "don't tell anyone this but..." which I would find to be incredibly shady and odd then I don't see why this information must be kept confidential. Please, who is it? Is it ILIO? I sure hope not. Is it a retail store? Come on, spill the beans.

As to the question about CPU, this is too vague to answer really accurately. In general it is very CPU efficient. Although if you use some of its fancier features like Stretch then that does take up some extra CPU (but worth it and you can also bounce to audio when you need to). You can sequence 16 parts nicely with most faster computers these days. I've seen up to 32 parts going on a very fast system but you have to economize your buffer settings a bit and it also depends on what kind of polyphony is being used up. However, this would be the case for any orchestral sample player product. So, relative to the competition I'd say it is either on par or sometimes better on the CPU (for example, some of the other libraries are larger in size and have more simulataneous parts per instrument which takes up more CPU for those extra things).

[Squids]

<--- at the dealers, not you, Michael. How'd you like to be holding onto product that sells for $2499 for the original library, then later, it gets released for $599 instead? Magically, the 'original', more expensive, version is going to sound better.

Of course, I'd thought the same thing, Devon, but it was also possible there was something I didn't know, and that's why I've done more research. MP, according to what I've read here today, will have serious implications not only for the previous Miroslav libraries, but for all the other expensive libraries out there. When something this big (and this provocative to the industry) occurs, taking a close looks seems warranted.

Well obviously, it'll have an impact on the original library. For other libraries? Personally, I don't think so. Philly seems to be priced right for what you get. It's not VSL, and I'm pretty sure Squids would even say that it wasn't meant to compete with the highest of the high end libraries. (Smack me down if I'm wrong Dave. ) Each orchestral library has its place and its appropriate price-point. The original MV library was grossly overpriced for many years ($3500 originally, then $2500 more recently.) Philharmonik brought some nice improvements, and brought the price down to a level that is more appropriate and in-line with the current market.

Each orchestral library has its own strengths and weaknesses. It's a matter of doing the research to see which library fits with your needs, and keeping in mind that no one single library is 'best'. Just think of it like another tool in the tool box. Just some tools, like a swiss army knife, are handy for a lot of things.

Devon

Oh, I think it DOES compete with the high end orchestral libraries of today. But, it does it in a different way than most people might expect. Obviously the price part. But, much more than that. Also the portability aspect (can install it on a laptop for example... don't need hundreds of gigs of HD space). It is more efficient and faster to use. It has actually some high end features such as what you can do with Stretch (and Devon I think you will enjoy the video I did to see how it can be used) that no other orchestral products (even VSL) have. Ironically that can sometimes get you more variety of pitch bending and glissando, alternate durations and variation in true vibrato than other clunkier techniques that take up a lot more hard drive space. But, the most important thing of all is THE SOUND of it!!!! This is the absolute most important thing about it because think about this for a second. At the end of the day when someone listens to a piece of music do they know what you used? Do they know how many gigs it was or how much you paid for it? Nope. They only knew how it sounds. Is it lush and beautiful? Is it moving? Does it fit into the song well? Those are things that Miroslav Philharmonik can do at a very appealing aesthetic and professional sounding level. It may not have every feature under the sun, tons of gigabytes of material (although 7 is a nice balance if you ask me... not too big, not too small) but is sure SOUNDS good in the context of music!

So, like Devon, I own several different orchestral libraries. I DO appreciate the fancy stuff with larger high end libraries today. I love all of that! But, having recently been making a lot of music lately (yay, finally spending more time doing that! lol) I find that it is ironic that a lot of times my Miroslav sounds are just better in the mix than my VSL or QLSO or other library sounds! Even if they can do more tricks, that part isn't always important and what tends to paramount is how it sounds musically first... the COLOR of it if you will. The FEELING. Hard to describe and it is personal as well. Anyway, more and more I am thinking that it really does stand up to any orchestral product no matter what the price. For many people it may be all they need. For working composers it is easily a good "me too" product to add to their collection (why not? It is so inexpensive anyway).

By the way, Michael, the question you had about key switching vs. multichannel articulations... if you are not playing it LIVE (I don't mean in concert I mean as a single performance) then key switching may not even be what you want. I happen to like that sort of feature because I do like to do that live. But, it isn't always crucial for me either and as I said there are many other ways to switch articulations live. However, for sequencing, the best way to do it is to meticulously put in your parts on different midi channels when you have the MULTI patches loaded up (that come preloaded with a variety of articulations... or you can make endless custom MULTIS yourself too). So, you play a legato part and then if you want to do a staccato section you play that on a separate midi channel. Doing it this way WILL take you some time to get it just right (also modulation the volume swell for realism and many other techniques help). But, with ANY orchestral product it is a question of the more you put in the more you can get out of it.

[synergy543]

Oh cool! I see, I select Zone and then hit Tune and not only can I make these adjustments by zone but I can also visualize how the keyboard zones are layed out. VERY USEFUL!!

I disagree that resonance is a desirable "feature" for orchestral instruments samples. Almost every other orchestral library program uses 6dB per octave filters when using filters at all.

[Squids]

I disagree that resonance is a desirable "feature" for orchestral instruments samples. Almost every other orchestral library program uses 6dB per octave filters when using filters at all.

Well, I go by ear over anything. In the SampleTank engine I happen to find the 12db filter setting up at 20K with resonance set to 6 or 7 (which is actually flat because at 0 it is below) to be the best sounding at default. Most of the time the filter is barely being used anyway, but at least this gives it a sound more similar to what it was like in the previous sampler versions. But, again, these choices are also up to you. There's a 6db filter setting. If you like that better then use that!

[DevonB]

Oh, I think it DOES compete with the high end orchestral libraries of today. But, it does it in a different way than most people might expect.

Each library competes in its own way. VSL still doesn't have competition with its Legato Tool. I have a feeling Philly doesn't have competition for speed of composition.

Each library, I have learned, has differentiated itself in one form or another. Not bad, just 'different'. Really depends what's important to the composer. For most people, it does seem to be speed. For the connoisseur, massive amount of articulations, control, and ultimate realism is more important. I believe that part of the population to be much smaller... unless you WANT to believe that Northern Sounds is the 'mass majority'

The sound quality of MV has always had a dear space in my heart, so I can't argue that with nearly 10 years experience with the original library. Again, another factor to consider.

So many choices... life with orchestral libraries has dramatically improved over the last 10 years, hasn't it?

Devon

[synergy543]

Well, I go by ear over anything. In the SampleTank engine I happen to find the 12db filter setting up at 20K with resonance set to 6 or 7 (which is actually flat because at 0 it is below) to be the best sounding at default. Most of the time the filter is barely being used anyway, but at least this gives it a sound more similar to what it was like in the previous sampler versions. But, again, these choices are also up to you. There's a 6db filter setting. If you like that better then use that!

Sounds like its being used more as an anti-aliasing filter than as a default setting for an audio filter. But if this is the case, why not the 24dB filter? In any case the sounds are beautiful so it all seems like a technicality to me. I just was trying to understand the reasoning behind the settings.

[synergy543]

Squids, is it possible for me to assign the mod wheel (CC1) to control the Flute 1 volume level? I want to make something like the AMV patches so I have volume expression over the wind instruments. I've gone over the manual on P.23 on associating MIDI control but I can't figure out if this is possible. When I open the MIDI control window for the Envelope Level it says "N/A" so it appears I can't assign MIDI CC to this? Is it possible to do this? Or is there another way to accomplish what I want (realtime volume control)?

[Kim Lajoie]

Click and drag up on the "N/A" text.

-Kim.

[Squids]

Well, I go by ear over anything. In the SampleTank engine I happen to find the 12db filter setting up at 20K with resonance set to 6 or 7 (which is actually flat because at 0 it is below) to be the best sounding at default. Most of the time the filter is barely being used anyway, but at least this gives it a sound more similar to what it was like in the previous sampler versions. But, again, these choices are also up to you. There's a 6db filter setting. If you like that better then use that!

Sounds like its being used more as an anti-aliasing filter than as a default setting for an audio filter. But if this is the case, why not the 24dB filter? In any case the sounds are beautiful so it all seems like a technicality to me. I just was trying to understand the reasoning behind the settings.

The reasoning was simply that it sounded good this way. Sometimes using one's ears is the best spec to go by. Of course, it is subjective. This is how I like it. You may like it another way. But, usually if someone is knowledgeable enough to even be talking about this then the know how to tweak a patch they way they like it. If we didn't already go overboard with the amount of presets, it wouldn't have been a bad idea to do different filter versions because each does a have a different sound to it in a subtle way... but, there are limits! So, we went with the 12db and advanced users can mess around with the other options of the powerful multimode filter (as well as many other editable parameters... in fact, more than you get on any other orchestral plug-in btw!).

[Squids]

Squids, is it possible for me to assign the mod wheel (CC1) to control the Flute 1 volume level? I want to make something like the AMV patches so I have volume expression over the wind instruments. I've gone over the manual on P.23 on associating MIDI control but I can't figure out if this is possible. When I open the MIDI control window for the Envelope Level it says "N/A" so it appears I can't assign MIDI CC to this? Is it possible to do this? Or is there another way to accomplish what I want (realtime volume control)?

The best is to control the "SWELL" macro. This is a smooth control of the volume and it is what we use for AMV patches. Just hit the midi cntrl button and then MACRO - SWELL knob and set your min and max settings (default is 120 I believe so you may want that to be your upper limit unless you want to go ONE louder... as in "this one goes to 11" ).

[synergy543]

Kim & Squids, Thank you both for your helpful answers. I've got it working now. Funny how I'd get stuck on that click and drag thing. I tried everything - except that. See Squids, a little bit of knowledge can be a dangerous thing , it doesn't mean you know all the answers. But thanks to your Sunday morning tech support (come on guys - get a life ), now I have all the answers!

And as for Miroslav vs earlier versions, I also have AKAI versions and these editing tips will allow me to achieve the same sonic results with my programs. The main difference between the two is not one of sound quality but of ease-of-use vs flexibility (individual sample access).

[nexussynth]

The keyswitch stuff is not that important if you sequence your parts

I, too, love a beautiful sound, but do you mean that you don't use any substitute for keyswitching when sequencing, or that you're happy with workarounds? If so, care to describe them?

Well the original concept Miroslav Vitous had for sequencing his library involved putting the different long and short notes and different articualtions on separate tracks. This means real-time playing is difficult when you are used to keyswitching. I'm one of those people who never warmed-up to the concept of keyswitches (It always feel like playing 'wrong' notes or something.)

I sequence my parts and then draw in rubati or tempo changes and other expressions. I put the notes for staccato on one track and the long notes go on their own track, etc. This is just what Miroslav himself does, apparently.

The sound of this library is so nice I'm sure you will find techniques and work-arounds of your own, so you may use it and enjoy it to your satisfaction.

It also embodies some of the "Personal Orchestra" concepts of using a smaller set of articulation to mimic having more articulations at your use.

I'm sure there is a keyswitching workaround that you might use

[nexussynth]

As for your other question about the 12b filter, the reason is because of the way it sounds. The 6db filter does not allow the possibility of resonance to be used and the 12b does which can sweeten the sound sometimes. Of course, if you don't like it you can always choose your own settings.

Yeah, I thought myself that i might want to use the 6db filter as I do in Kontakt because it sounds less synthy, but I am surprised to find the 12db is better and doesn't sound synthy to my ears (and I am very picky on this subject!).

[Squids]

As for your other question about the 12b filter, the reason is because of the way it sounds. The 6db filter does not allow the possibility of resonance to be used and the 12b does which can sweeten the sound sometimes. Of course, if you don't like it you can always choose your own settings.

Yeah, I thought myself that i might want to use the 6db filter as I do in Kontakt because it sounds less synthy, but I am surprised to find the 12db is better and doesn't sound synthy to my ears (and I am very picky on this subject!).

As a taste consideration I can see how the 6db would be a nice choice too. Maybe instrument by instrument there is one better than the other even by my own tastes. However, it is subjective so sometimes we go for consistency. If someone did want to turn up the resonance from its default setting then at least they will hear a result (whereas if it was at 6db they wouldn't). But, in retrospect I think we should have had some child presets using the other filter options just for variety. I'll take a note.

As we make more combis (oh and I have a surprise for all Philharmonik users coming... and free as well) I will perhaps make more use of the variety of filter options just to mix things up. I will also do more experimentation with Stretch parameters. You know that you have the ST2.1 engine (actually even more advanced than the 2.1) in Philharmonik including the new Stretch and PS/TS. So, check that stuff out!

[dougsyo]

I'm one of those people who never warmed-up to the concept of keyswitches (It always feel like playing 'wrong' notes or something.)

The concept of keyswitching makes perfect sense to me.

But then I have a Hammond organ, and the presets on B3-type organs are just another dozen keys. They stand out visually, but they're not easily reprogrammed.

Doug