realistic strings

lol... ya'all know what i use.. right? ... same as always...
personally i'd say it's insane to buy something like the triton expansion card for such a meek thing as strings... i mean, it cost more than a sample cd-rom and that's basically all you need if you don't want to make them on your modular synth (which is perfectely possible) ...
 
I'm a guitarist so my experience is limited to Roland stuff, but the most realistic ensemble sounds I've been able to get are by mixing and layering from 2 or 3 voices and messing with the attacks to get nice arco with some bite to it. The biggest factor, IMHO is in voicing the parts so that the sections (cello, viola, violin1, violin2)
are spread out and don't step on each other.If you have access look at the Rimksy-Korsakov book on orchestral writing. He (Berlioz) cites some cool examples of how to space and spread the sections to get huge sound from 3 and 4 parts. If you voice the chords as simple closely voiced (one-handed) you will never escape the dreaded "ACCORDIONS FROM HELL" syndrome no matter how much you spend on gear.
chazba
 
errr.........searched for those authors/composers, couldn't find any solid links to the book, got any hints??



Laj
 
Have you even played the XP30? Please don't put SF's and a synth like the XP30 in the same sentence - its just plain ridiculous to compare the two.
Click to expand...
You're right. There are many soundfonts that are WAY better. Saying that soundfonts must be inferior to the built-in sounds on a synth shows me that you haven't investigated them enough. At it's heart, soundfont is a sample format, and there are many sample formats that would wipe the floor with the XP30. Considering that the string sounds in any modern synth are basically derived from maybe 20 MB of samples max, it would be very easy to dig up a 120 MB soundfont (or AKAI, or Giga, etc.) that would kick ass on any of them.
 
OK, dumb question:

Where does one find soundfonts and how does one use them?

I think if they're good enough to cause a debate, they're worth considering ... especially since it's free to try 'em out, right??
 
www.thesoundsite.net

I would suggest you try the compressed soundfonts. You need to download a tool called sfpack to expand them, but they are about half the size of the uncompressed ones. This site has a ton of soundfonts. The only drawbacks are that the list takes a long time to load, and that the site only allows you to download 1 soundfont at a time.

search for soundfonts on the web and you'll find a lot more.

this one has a few good links, though it never seems to get updated:
http://www.hammersound.net/cgi-bin/soundlink.pl

once you have a couple, you can load them into your soundcard (if you have a soundblaster) or you can load them into a plugin that reads soundfonts, there are a lot of them out there, look on www.kvr-vst.com for more info.
 
Last edited:
charger said:

You're right. There are many soundfonts that are WAY better. Saying that soundfonts must be inferior to the built-in sounds on a synth shows me that you haven't investigated them enough. At it's heart, soundfont is a sample format, and there are many sample formats that would wipe the floor with the XP30. Considering that the string sounds in any modern synth are basically derived from maybe 20 MB of samples max, it would be very easy to dig up a 120 MB soundfont (or AKAI, or Giga, etc.) that would kick ass on any of them.
Click to expand...

Since when is the quality of a sample the sole factor for sound quality?

Are you going to tell me the AD/DA filters on a SoundBlaster card are comparable to a professional synth? How about filters and effects?
 
Are you going to tell me the AD/DA filters on a SoundBlaster card are comparable to a professional synth? How about filters and effects?
Click to expand...
I dunno. I never use the AD/DA filters when I'm making music with my Soundblaster card. It's great for games though! ;)

In fact, many software samplers load the SF2 format, and many sample libraries are available for it. Soundfonts may be linked in your head with a Soundblaster card, but that doesn't mean they are not a viable sample format. And yes, there are many software samplers and synths (e.g. Kontakt, Reaktor) that have better filters and effects than the XP 30, and many other "professional" synths. To pretend that they don't exist is ignorant.

And there are MANY soundcards that have far better AD/DA converters than a "professional synth." You do realize that inside that "professional synth" it's just a specialized computer running specialized software, right?
 
triton le, combination strings

i own a triton and i love the strings on it. you can make combinations too, so you can layer differant strings to get an orchestra effect.

shit works good. id try to go with something from korg, but the triton le is fairly inexpensive. peace.
 
samples are the only way to go...

I may catch heat for saying this BUT....the only way your going to get half way realistic sounding strings (or anything else for that matter) is with a sampler and good large sampled instruments. I have some strings patches that are over 500 megs and thats just for say a violin section. When you consider a 500 meg violin section vs. a 200k sampled violin section there just can't (and shouldn't) be a comparision. Most keyboards and synths only have 8 megs total for all the sounds on board which somtimes number over 500 patches!!

Donnie
 
No, you're right. I've seen sample libraries that are 20 CDs for an orchestra, and when you consider the incredible complexity of any actual physical instrument, it makes sense that it would take a great deal of data to realistically represent it. That was the crux of my "soundfont/sample" argument. Whenever I start to obsess on the sampeld sounds I use (e.g. I start hearing the loop points, or some timbre is just not right) I always think to myself how much cheaper it would be to just go out and buy a used violin and just learn to play the damn thing. It can't be as hard as programming it to sound real.
 
This is a very interesting discussion. Thanks to all who are participating. Here's how I think the input is helping my decisions:

* It seems that people like the Kurz 2500, Roland XP30 (these sounds are included in the JV1010 module from what I understand), and Triton, as well as some other supporting players. But they have to be played right (obviously) and each has drawbacks ... elements of strings each does well and does not.

* There are soundfonts which can be usable if you have the right delivery mechanism ... and it seems a soundblaster card is NOT that mechanism. I'm understanding, then, that a sampler is the right mechanism. I don't own a sampler ...

* There are CD sets of samples available for a hefty price. Again, I don't own a sampler, and if I were to spend that kind of money ...

* The best realistic strings are string instruments themselves. I wouldn't have the patience or inclination to create my own samples. By the time I acquired enough funds to buy high-quality stringed instruments and learned to play them (I am a multi-instrumentalist and can play fretless bass, so the idea of intonation isn't too daunting), I could have worked to earn the money to pay string players to do the job ... no, I could afford them in 1/10th the time it'd take to do it myself.

So, I'm thinking I'll demo some of the keyboards mentioned here (time to look up all my synth-playing friends) ... if I can't make that work and it seems the strings are more important in the overall mix (obviously strings aren't the main event; if they were, of course I'd use the real thing!), then I WILL notate the orchestration and hire the requisite string musicians.

Thanks for all your input.
 
cd samples are only expensive if you plan on doing MAJOR orchestration. However, Miroslav Vitous and Seidlaczek both have smaller versions of their more expensive versions. These are just as good sonically ect... except there are less options to pull from. Both sample library are anywhere from 130-400 dollars. Add in the cost of a soft sampler and you've got great strings from 300-600 dollars.
 
I use the JV 2080 with the Orchestral expansion board. The strings on it seem very realistic to me.
In order to acheive realism though, its important to understand the range of the instrument. For instance you wouldn't play a flute say at the C1-C2 range. The instrument itself simply doesn't have that range. If your strings sound odd in the lower octaves, then it could be that you're playing outside of the real range of the real instrument.
I used to have a nice little handy-dandy chart that showed, on a keyboard, the ranges of all the orchestral instruments. I'll have to hunt it down and post it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top