Menu
What's new
By:
Filters

Tokyo Scoring Strings 2.0 Development Progress - New previews on page 3 (late December)

Sarah Mancuso said:
Here's a short lyrical clip I put together last night using the pianissimo dynamic only (and lots of layered 8th note RR sequences) with the current TSS 2.0 legato prototype. Modwheel is at 0 for the entire clip, just using CC11 to add some volume movement. (Usual disclaimer about this being a pre-pre-alpha work in progress and subject to change.)

View attachment TSS2-SoftDyn-007.mp3
Click to expand...
Sarah, apologies if your demos already answer this question - you have already mentioned about runs, will the legato also feature "short" or marcato like attacks dependent on Velocity, or a similar KS / CC controller or whatever , to allow it do punchy , lines with the legato too?

Just saw the thread and asking in my eagerness before I have time to properly listen....
 
Paul Jelfs said:
Sarah, apologies if your demos already answer this question - you have already mentioned about runs, will the legato also feature "short" or marcato like attacks dependent on Velocity, or a similar KS / CC controller or whatever , to allow it do punchy , lines with the legato too?

Just saw the thread and asking in my eagerness before I have time to properly listen....
Click to expand...
Yep! TSS allows you to layer velocity-dependent shorts on top of initial notes and/or on top of legato notes. I haven't utilized this in any of my demos so far because they've been running in a simplified legato-prototyping script rather than the full Tokyo 2.0 Engine, but that will likely be changing soon.
 
Sounds amazing, I wonder if it can do legato melodies like this from Hiroyuki Sawanos YouSee-Power:
Ive tried several string libraries and none of them can do melodies like this one because of the huge note jumps.
 
Hurakion said:
Sounds amazing, I wonder if it can do legato melodies like this from Hiroyuki Sawanos YouSee-Power:
Ive tried several string libraries and none of them can do melodies like this one because of the huge note jumps.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the feedback! We've internally discussed some ideas for handling wide intervals like this, and I'm going to make sure that gets done for 2.0.
 
2 questions, and I'm wondering if they are addressed in the update:

I think there's no way to turn off polylegato when doing lookahead mode? Maybe I'm missing something (scouring Google hasn't done any good) but if I'm not, is a change for that in the works?

Also, I think there's a bug with the 'velocity >swell' knob? I can make it work fine in any of the regular patches, but turning it on does nothing in the mic mixer patches.

Are these planned for a fix?
 
crutos1 said:
2 questions, and I'm wondering if they are addressed in the update:

I think there's no way to turn off polylegato when doing lookahead mode? Maybe I'm missing something (scouring Google hasn't done any good) but if I'm not, is a change for that in the works?

Also, I think there's a bug with the 'velocity >swell' knob? I can make it work fine in any of the regular patches, but turning it on does nothing in the mic mixer patches.

Are these planned for a fix?
Click to expand...
Sorry about the issues you've run into! These should be fixed in the upcoming free 2.0 update.

ariatec said:
Will TSS 2.0 include full ensemble patches? Really praying it will, it'd make sketching so much quicker 🙏
Click to expand...
It's something we'd like to do, but I'm not sure if it'll be in 2.0 itself or in a further update.
 
Minkiechu said:
I'm in the market for my first orchestral libraries (and I'm a software minimalist, so I wont succumb to GAS and will likely only have a handful of libraries throughout my life) and TSS is definitely #1 in terms of what I'm considering for this section size. I'm looking forward to seeing how it evolves as you continue to develop it. Great pre-pre-alpha previews!

Does anyone know what larger symphonic sized string libraries layer well with TSS? I'm really looking hard for the most ideal match. I've been listening to Spitfire SSO Pro (sounds good), VSL (sounds good, but they have several options and who knows which one..), Berlin Symphonic (likely wouldn't go with this...), Spitfire ARO (sounds good, not yet complete), ICONICA Opus (sounds good, leaning most towards this)...

I already have my soloists picked out from a range of different developers.
Click to expand...
I've heard that Modern Scoring Strings and LA Scoring Strings 3 (both by audiobro) work really well together with TSS. I fact, THE Hiroyuki Sawano himself uses TSS together with LASS3 in his compositions.
 
May I ask a naive question? What are the problems with v1 that warrant a complete rewrite?
 
dyross said:
May I ask a naive question? What are the problems with v1 that warrant a complete rewrite?
Click to expand...
It's not that TSS1 is inherently buggy or problematic, but more that in the last few years @neblix has designed an internal framework that is much more powerful AND maintainable than anything we've ever used before. This applies not just to TSS2.0 but will be used for just about all our projects going forward.

The combination of powerful and maintainable is the important part. For example, the current implementation of lookahead is very powerful in how many features it supports. But it's also written in a way that makes it hard to modify and improve without turning into "spaghetti" code. (This isn't unique to Kontakt scripting, it's a threat in all software development... but the nature of KSP makes it a lot more likely to happen!)

There are features we wanted in TSS2.0 that would have been a big headache to graft into TSS1. With the new engine, even if we come up with equally complex features after 2.0, it will be comparably much easier to put them in.
 
Andrew Aversa said:
There are features we wanted in TSS2.0 that would have been a big headache to graft into TSS1. With the new engine, even if we come up with equally complex features after 2.0, it will be comparably much easier to put them in.
Click to expand...
I'm sure others have already expressed this thought, but I wanted to chime in to say that as a customer (and also software developer), it's really refreshing to see such transparency with your customers (and in particular, this community). There's been a lot of speculation and backlash against some developers here, but overall, I think the vast majority of members of the forum appreciate the additional check-ins and feedback about what's going on under the covers with libraries and instrument developers. Thank you Andrew & all the folks working at Impact Soundworks for your candid updates! I think it helps set better expectations with your users, and shares the framework of challenges. you face to build maintainable and sustainable codebases for the future!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom