Audiomodeling String Sections
- Thread starter Thorny
- Start date
Emasters posted this on the original thread before I remembered to go back and post that I had started this list:
“At AudioDeluxe the intro sale is $479, plus another $49 off for their October sale, for a total of $430. You also get almost $13 in reward dollars to use with future purchase(s) (for an equivalent price of $417 after applying reward dollars in the future). And you can also apply any reward dollars in your account already. Pretty nice discount.”
“At AudioDeluxe the intro sale is $479, plus another $49 off for their October sale, for a total of $430. You also get almost $13 in reward dollars to use with future purchase(s) (for an equivalent price of $417 after applying reward dollars in the future). And you can also apply any reward dollars in your account already. Pretty nice discount.”
maxbedroom
Active Member
I really wonder if this is better than SWAM Solo duplicated and humanized for X amount of players. I looked on the website, and it's not clear if the ensembles work by stacking solo players or what. And if it does work that way, the cpu requirements listed indicate that something is being generalized or otherwise sacrificed to play everything at once on modest hardware. The new humanization and room placement features are nifty, but it would be very interesting to see an owner of Ensembles compare it with stacked Solos.
This is one from 6 years ago - stacked SWAM Solos:
(From this thread)
Compare it with the new Ensembles demo:
This is one from 6 years ago - stacked SWAM Solos:
(From this thread)
Compare it with the new Ensembles demo:
Windbag
Broken.
Humanization is what I’m most curious about here…..
Having watched through a bunch of the demos, the Sections seem a bit like a multi-bodied modification on the solo strings (which I love) with few(?) changes to the control scheme. At first blush, this would seem to solve the nasal tone that larges groups of SWAM solos tended to take on, and the V3 UI is welcome bit of familiarity, having worked well for the other SWAM instruments.
It seems like the approach to divisi is to supply you with group size control and body alternates (to avoid unison issues) to let you just handle lines individually rather than attempt any any auto-arranging. I'm ok with this so long the divisi alternates offer enough variation. Also the room placement is probably intended to help prevent overlapping tonality but I’ll be a little surprised if that manages to pry reverb snobs away from their beloved convolutions.
Curiously, though, I note no apparent sync/tune/randomization controls as might pertain to a group of instruments rather than just one, and suspect that might be contributing to impressions like this (pasted from the Solo Strings thread):
However...after repeated experience finding their instruments to be much more capable than their demos would suggest (sorry guys….pay attention to the half of that that’s a compliment) I tend not to put TOO much stock in the early samples. Since we’re at the top of a new thread, here’s what I’ve seen so far (apart from the above):
The official overview:
In-house demos:
Morricone - Deborah’s Theme from Once Upon a Time in America:
(I found a recording of this for those unfamiliar)
Brandenburg Concerto No. 3 - Allegro:
(Compare to a recording of the same piece)
Bruckner String Quintet (III - Adagio):
(Compare to a recording of the same piece)
A pop track I assume to be Stefano’s own handywork:
Having watched through a bunch of the demos, the Sections seem a bit like a multi-bodied modification on the solo strings (which I love) with few(?) changes to the control scheme. At first blush, this would seem to solve the nasal tone that larges groups of SWAM solos tended to take on, and the V3 UI is welcome bit of familiarity, having worked well for the other SWAM instruments.
It seems like the approach to divisi is to supply you with group size control and body alternates (to avoid unison issues) to let you just handle lines individually rather than attempt any any auto-arranging. I'm ok with this so long the divisi alternates offer enough variation. Also the room placement is probably intended to help prevent overlapping tonality but I’ll be a little surprised if that manages to pry reverb snobs away from their beloved convolutions.
Curiously, though, I note no apparent sync/tune/randomization controls as might pertain to a group of instruments rather than just one, and suspect that might be contributing to impressions like this (pasted from the Solo Strings thread):
...I am inclined to agree - particularly in faster runs where you might expect to hear scatter, the tight alignment of the note changes reminds me of someone else's description of "accordion-like" legato changes (referring in that case to other modeled strings). I also wonder about offset and sync controls for vibratos and tremolos ..these are textures I am totally dependent on sample libraries for and the bits of tremolo in the demos sound very same-y.
However...after repeated experience finding their instruments to be much more capable than their demos would suggest (sorry guys….pay attention to the half of that that’s a compliment) I tend not to put TOO much stock in the early samples. Since we’re at the top of a new thread, here’s what I’ve seen so far (apart from the above):
The official overview:
In-house demos:
Morricone - Deborah’s Theme from Once Upon a Time in America:
(I found a recording of this for those unfamiliar)
Brandenburg Concerto No. 3 - Allegro:
(Compare to a recording of the same piece)
Bruckner String Quintet (III - Adagio):
(Compare to a recording of the same piece)
A pop track I assume to be Stefano’s own handywork:
Last edited:
Windbag
Broken.
And some video demonstrations by youtubers with advanced copies:
(I think this might be the most thorough walkthrough so far)
Not too many of these seem to be using the combination of bow pressure and position controls that I have found to be essential timbre tools in the solos, so I will be interested to hear more articulate demonstrations. I will also be curious to hear the SWAM Solos OVER the ensembles as I have found that to be a powerful addition to traditional sampled strings
If anyone grabs these, I’ll put in for a quick-n-dirty bounce of just noodling around, and perhaps some third party ‘verb and placement plugins.
(I think this might be the most thorough walkthrough so far)
Not too many of these seem to be using the combination of bow pressure and position controls that I have found to be essential timbre tools in the solos, so I will be interested to hear more articulate demonstrations. I will also be curious to hear the SWAM Solos OVER the ensembles as I have found that to be a powerful addition to traditional sampled strings
If anyone grabs these, I’ll put in for a quick-n-dirty bounce of just noodling around, and perhaps some third party ‘verb and placement plugins.
DANIELE
I love to make music but I also love to make music
A test I usually do to test a strings library (or virtual instrument in this case) is a bunch of very repetitive parts like same note very fast staccatos or some very fast legato repetition etc...
This way you are able to get if the instrument is able to reproduce all those fancy little variations a real instrument does when it is played this way (because of the player also).
Of course you should apply some expression and velocity variations to that king of test but not so much, just to see how the instrument behave.
I could be able to grab it for $ 417 but I feel it is still a bit too high price for me. I'm thinking about it.
I have a bigger wallet on Audio Plugin Deals, if only they sell Swam instruments.
This way you are able to get if the instrument is able to reproduce all those fancy little variations a real instrument does when it is played this way (because of the player also).
Of course you should apply some expression and velocity variations to that king of test but not so much, just to see how the instrument behave.
I could be able to grab it for $ 417 but I feel it is still a bit too high price for me. I'm thinking about it.
I have a bigger wallet on Audio Plugin Deals, if only they sell Swam instruments.
DANIELE
I love to make music but I also love to make music
If there is someone that already have them I have two questions:
1) Is rebow function available?
2) Is flautando available, like with solo strings at lower dynamics?
EDIT
Oh, I forgot, it's a pity there is no Col Legno available.
1) Is rebow function available?
2) Is flautando available, like with solo strings at lower dynamics?
EDIT
Oh, I forgot, it's a pity there is no Col Legno available.
Last edited:
maxbedroom
Active Member
As a card-carrying vibrato lover: After all that talk towards the end about how pronounced the vibrato is in the original recording, they seem to crank the intensity up to the max, and then... flatness. It seems like if the instrument is fully modeled it should be able to produce the vibrato intensity of a standard pop song string line and then some. Why not let it go up to crazy depths, guys? That would solve all my problems...
On a positive note, this is a stunning composition. A real studio string group could really do it justice. The description confirms the composer is Stefano Lucato, btw.
Windbag
Broken.
While I kinda half agree, I think this is probably a function of controlling the instrument model that there isn't a particularly graceful way around....
SWAM seems to have conformed to a common control scheme of triggering a slower transition in the lowest quarter (or so) of the velocity range, and for strings this kinda fits 2 functions in my mind:
• quick, reach-based slurs, and
• stylistic glissandi (which I don't really ever use).
Admittedly I have trouble controlling either one reliably with velocity, and tend not to use it much. In LASS I'll go edit notes manually if I need a large interval to sound believable, but with SWAM solos played pretty exclusively on a Roli, I get a gratifyingly authentic version of the first type just from large moves across the wave/keys just as you would a fingerboard. And this produces an interesting result - and anticipatory bend on the outgoing note and a smaller, settling bend on the incoming one (sometimes not, though).
The built-in ones, on the other hand, sound to me like they're doing a continuous glide from stop A to stop B, and I'm really not sure how else you'd do it. The good news is that it's entirely defeat-able and all of the Solo Strings instances in my projects have transition time set to a slider rather than velocity
...so that was a long way of saying "it's optional."
What I am curious about in this new Sections set is whether there is any kind of multi-instrument control over these things - i.e. can I "loosen" up the group so that transitions sound more believable (is there a buried setting somewhere?) or is this really a single model running a body that produces the sound of multiple instruments?
I am reminded of WIVI modeled winds, which were so lightweight (i use the past tense like I don't still have the clarinet in my orch template) that you could build sections by simply stacking up individual instances, complete with spatial placement, individual vibrato controls, auto-divisi and randomization/humanization settings that, if I recall correctly, were mappable if you wanted to play around with wandering pitch as a performable technique. I think that's kinda what I pictured at the notion of SWAM sections
SWAM seems to have conformed to a common control scheme of triggering a slower transition in the lowest quarter (or so) of the velocity range, and for strings this kinda fits 2 functions in my mind:
• quick, reach-based slurs, and
• stylistic glissandi (which I don't really ever use).
Admittedly I have trouble controlling either one reliably with velocity, and tend not to use it much. In LASS I'll go edit notes manually if I need a large interval to sound believable, but with SWAM solos played pretty exclusively on a Roli, I get a gratifyingly authentic version of the first type just from large moves across the wave/keys just as you would a fingerboard. And this produces an interesting result - and anticipatory bend on the outgoing note and a smaller, settling bend on the incoming one (sometimes not, though).
The built-in ones, on the other hand, sound to me like they're doing a continuous glide from stop A to stop B, and I'm really not sure how else you'd do it. The good news is that it's entirely defeat-able and all of the Solo Strings instances in my projects have transition time set to a slider rather than velocity
...so that was a long way of saying "it's optional."
What I am curious about in this new Sections set is whether there is any kind of multi-instrument control over these things - i.e. can I "loosen" up the group so that transitions sound more believable (is there a buried setting somewhere?) or is this really a single model running a body that produces the sound of multiple instruments?
I am reminded of WIVI modeled winds, which were so lightweight (i use the past tense like I don't still have the clarinet in my orch template) that you could build sections by simply stacking up individual instances, complete with spatial placement, individual vibrato controls, auto-divisi and randomization/humanization settings that, if I recall correctly, were mappable if you wanted to play around with wandering pitch as a performable technique. I think that's kinda what I pictured at the notion of SWAM sections
mbishop
Active Member
I was noticing this as well. I wish they had a curve that I could map midi velocity to portamento length because I accidentally play a long portamento all the time. As it was, I used the "Modifier" MIDI insert in Logic to restrict my velocity input to the top 80% of the range which made a big difference. I haven't tried the slider though.
It's a strange default and in my head I'm imagining they set it that way so the portamento feature would be discoverable, but my brain has been wired to associate velocity with intensity and I always end up playing very lightly in very melodic contemplative passages which sounds like my pitch wheel fell right off the wagon. This adjustment made a big difference.
The other strange default I'm noticing is the vibrato randomization which is set to 5% and sounds still so uniform that it's rather synthetic to my ear. I raised that value and it sounded better so I just set it to the highest at 20% and I really like that so far.
Windbag
Broken.
(i'm replying here based on the assumption that this control carries over to sections but anyone with the library correct me if I'm wrong!)
If I'm editing after the fact anyway, this gives me a separate curve without any attack involvement (though honestly I just never touch it...if I want a slur, I play it in)
Vibrato I could go on about, but one my favorite things about the solo instruments has been the ability to play in my own via Roli, Touché or joystick, and this just isn't feasible for a section where you have multiple simultaneous vibratos (or the approximation thereof)
Well this doesn't modify the curve/threshold but it certainly prevents me from invoking slurs accidentally:
If I'm editing after the fact anyway, this gives me a separate curve without any attack involvement (though honestly I just never touch it...if I want a slur, I play it in)
Vibrato I could go on about, but one my favorite things about the solo instruments has been the ability to play in my own via Roli, Touché or joystick, and this just isn't feasible for a section where you have multiple simultaneous vibratos (or the approximation thereof)
Yes, given the curve and endpoint facilities already built into the UI, I don't see the harm in overshooting useful vibrato range and letting the user dial it back to taste. That's basically how SM brass is set up - max vibrato is absurd. Their string section does, as I understand it, have a vibrato sync control and this remains my main question for SWAM sections
Last edited:
maxbedroom
Active Member
I was looking into getting the solo strings but don't own any of those controllers. Is what you're describing simply a pitch bend CC control behind the scenes, something that could be drawn in manually? Or is there a deeper integration?
Windbag
Broken.
Aye, the CC is just pitch bend, but since you're manipulating the stop, AM's string model behaves very authentically (more so than pitch-shifting a recorded sample). I can dig up some more in depth discussion from when I was searching for physical vibrato controllers if you like...probably not too relevant here.
Major1981
Active Member
Haven’t checked rebow function. But flautando is possible. But the scratch sound isn’t half as appealing as in the solo instruments, where it’s noticeable and believable during the whole note. In the section it’s only the attack…
maxbedroom
Active Member
Cool, then can I ask if you recommend any controller combo if my goal is good modeled strings vibrato (and dynamics)? I'm in the early stages of looking into this kind of thing, but it seems like some vibrato is so intense, fast, and fluttery that it'd be impossible to move my hand or finger laterally at that speed, which I'd need to do with a Touche.
Windbag
Broken.
I'm gonna respond over in the Solo Strings thread since my rec will pertain heavily to those
I'd guess rebowing would be the same detaché mode summoned via sustain pedal in the solos....don't see why that'd missing here.
Also can I put in an additional request for some sordino/unmuted comparison? I thought the morricone piece above might have used it but looking at the screen captures, it seems not.
Last edited:
