# On the Fence About Spitfire Studio Woodwinds



## Apostate (Apr 19, 2019)

I really want an excellent, higher-range ensemble woodwind library (I have the Hein and EW for solo instruments, and I don't count the Albions).

I'm not sold on OT Berlin woodwinds, since I already have killer low woodwinds in Metropolis Ark II, so I could be wrong but that seems like a bit too much overlap for the price (and yeah, I've heard BWW are amazing).

_I'd be *super* grateful for any help._ I have the cash for the pro SSW now, so buying the library is definitely good for me right now.

By the way. I should add that whenever I ask my music friends these things they tell me to just start a topic on vi-control lol!


----------



## axb312 (Apr 19, 2019)

I remember seeing mostly negative reviews on here. Also wasn't impressed with the dynamic range..


----------



## Apostate (Apr 19, 2019)

axb312 said:


> I remember seeing mostly negative reviews on here. Also wasn't impressed with the dynamic range..



Thanks! I gathered mixed reviews from the earlier topics regarding the library.

I guess I'm a bit flummoxed that Spitfire would fumble at this point in their existence.


----------



## AllanH (Apr 19, 2019)

I like the studio woodwinds and use the instruments in my template as my default woodwinds. I ended up upgrading to Pro after a week or two.


----------



## dzilizzi (Apr 19, 2019)

Sonokinetic's woodwinds ensemble is actually pretty good. The only negative is they only have flutes, clarinets, oboes and bassoons. But if you have Met Ark, you probably have a number of the missing instruments.


----------



## Apostate (Apr 19, 2019)

AllanH said:


> I like the studio woodwinds and use the instruments in my template as my default woodwinds. I ended up upgrading to Pro after a week or two.



I'm guessing the Pro added microphones are at least part of the reason for the upgrade? Very interested in this.



dzilizzi said:


> Sonokinetic's woodwinds ensemble is actually pretty good. The only negative is they only have flutes, clarinets, oboes and bassoons. But if you have Met Ark, you probably have a number of the missing instruments.



This is another one I'm considering. A bit more expensive.


----------



## dzilizzi (Apr 19, 2019)

Apostate said:


> This is another one I'm considering. A bit more expensive.


I got it during their Christmas sale a couple years ago. It had an even better price this last year, so I'm not sure if it will be in the sale this year.


----------



## CT (Apr 19, 2019)

If you already have options for exposed, hyper-expressive solo parts, like the Chris Hein woodwinds, then I think Studio Woodwinds is an excellent addition. 

It's comprehensive and sonically honest, sitting very well with the rest of the Studio orchestra, and I'm sure with any others if you have the patience to mix and match. 

It probably won't satisfy you for super detailed solo performances, but that's why you have those other, more soloistic libraries. These are definitely orchestral ensemble woodwinds, although the occasional solo in a larger symphonic will come across just fine.

As with the rest of the Studio series, I would recommend going for Pro unless you *really* don't need the additional instruments and are completely satisfied with the single Tree 1 mic.


----------



## Brian Nowak (Apr 19, 2019)

I wouldn't be too concerned about BWW overlapping with any of the Arks. The Ark winds, while good at what they do, are pretty specialized and specific in their uses. I mean... 3 bass clarinets spread across the stereo field ain't exactly standard. 

BWW is pretty deep, and I find it is pretty programmable for writing convincing phrases. There are a few oddities within the library but it's nothing I haven't been able to work around.

It is, however, very expensive. And after this last christmas time sale OT did, it would be wise to wait and see how the wind blows on their future chances of doing another big sale. I personally felt a bit burnt after buying into their "we will never slash prices on the berlin series" bit and then cutting them by what... 50%? Maybe it was 40. But witcher way, ouch...


----------



## dzilizzi (Apr 19, 2019)

Brian Nowak said:


> I wouldn't be too concerned about BWW overlapping with any of the Arks. The Ark winds, while good at what they do, are pretty specialized and specific in their uses. I mean... 3 bass clarinets spread across the stereo field ain't exactly standard.
> 
> BWW is pretty deep, and I find it is pretty programmable for writing convincing phrases. There are a few oddities within the library but it's nothing I haven't been able to work around.
> 
> It is, however, very expensive. And after this last christmas time sale OT did, it would be wise to wait and see how the wind blows on their future chances of doing another big sale. I personally felt a bit burnt after buying into their "we will never slash prices on the berlin series" bit and then cutting them by what... 50%? Maybe it was 40. But witcher way, ouch...


40% on the orchestral stuff. The Arks, Inspire, and a couple other things got 50% plus (if you bought bundles) It was a great deal, especially because I was looking for a woodwind section that had more instruments than Sonokinetics. I like the sound, but I'm not sure it is worth full price to me.


----------



## rhye (Apr 19, 2019)

SSW is excellent and fairly consistent. I use them all the time and I don't remember seeing mostly negative reviews.
They are recorded in a dryer space than most libraries so keep that in mind before purchasing...


----------



## Apostate (Apr 19, 2019)

Man these are some mega-helpful posts, I'm really grateful!!!

I can see where I'm probably going to want the Professional right off.


----------



## Gingerbread (Apr 19, 2019)

I don't have Spitfire Studio Woodwinds, but I would strongly suggest taking a look at OT's Berlin Woodwind *Expansion B and C*. Not the main library, but the expansion sets, for which you don't need to have bought the main library. These are solo windwinds, and are fantastic. Less expensive than the main library, and in my opinion, better recorded with wonderfully expressive sampling.


----------



## Apostate (Apr 19, 2019)

Gingerbread said:


> I don't have Spitfire Studio Woodwinds, but I would strongly suggest taking a look at OT's Berlin Woodwind *Expansion B and C*. Not the main library, but the expansion sets, for which you don't need to have bought the main library. These are solo windwinds, and are fantastic. Less expensive than the main library, and in my opinion, better recorded with wonderfully expressive sampling.



Sounds great! But I'm looking for an ensemble library...and to be honest I am crazy about Hein solo woodwinds (and to a lesser degree the EWH).


----------



## Apostate (Apr 19, 2019)

Sooooo, where's the Easter Sale @Spitfire Team ?


----------



## jbuhler (Apr 19, 2019)

Apostate said:


> Sooooo, where's the Easter Sale @Spitfire Team ?


I think they did a May wishlist sale last year.


----------



## dzilizzi (Apr 19, 2019)

No! No more Spitfire sales. At least until next Christmas.


----------



## Apostate (Apr 19, 2019)

dzilizzi said:


> No! No more Spitfire sales. At least until next Christmas.



Argh.


----------



## markleake (Apr 19, 2019)

Sonokinetic Woods have fewer instruments and only the a3 ensembles, but they do have a large number of useful articulations (including alternative takes), and most importantly, they sound great. The tree mic will be a lot wetter sounding than Spitfire Studio Woods, but they do come with close mics also. I don't have SStW to compare the close mics to though.

If you want something fairly dry that covers most bases for orchestral work, including ensembles, then SStW would be a good choice. Be aware that some people are not a big fan of the hall they're recorded in though.

For ensembles in particular, if you want wetter (recorded in a large great sounding hall) and only want the "main" orchestral wood instruments, Sonokinetic is IMO up there with the best. It doesn't have much direct competition really.


----------



## sostenuto (Apr 19, 2019)

Tending to add CineWinds Monster Low Winds @ $99. and use with Sonokinetic Woods …..

Always time to add SStWW __ Core or Pro if better choice.


----------



## wst3 (Apr 20, 2019)

So many libraries!

I bought Spitfire Studio Woodwinds to supplement Cinewinds Core and Chris Hein Woodwinds Compact. It is a very nice, very flexible combination of tools. I may, at some point, add the big brothers of all three, but I'm in no hurry, and don't feel like I am missing out on anything right now.

As a result of my time with SSW I ended up adding the studio strings and brass (core only) as well.

So far I'm really quite happy.

I can only hope that I eventually outgrow them, since that would indicate that my skills as a composer/arranger/orchestrator/producer are improving - or I'm making so much money producing music that I no longer need to worry about it<G>!


----------



## nas (Apr 20, 2019)

I really like SF Symphonic Woodwinds. They do have the Air Studios sound baked in, although you can alter the ambience with mic mix settings. If you want a drier library that may offer more sonic versatility SF Studio Woodwinds may be worth checking out. For a larger symphonic sound I think SF SWW is great and it gets used here a lot.


----------



## dzilizzi (Apr 20, 2019)

We have to find new abbreviations for these things. To me SSWW/SWW/SSW = Spitfire Symphonic Woodwinds. So calling the Studio Woodwinds the same is getting very confusing. 

This goes for the strings as well.


----------



## sostenuto (Apr 20, 2019)

Agree !  Been using SStWW or SStOrch.


----------



## Reid Rosefelt (Apr 20, 2019)

I bought Spitfire Studio Woodwinds, Jr. for $150 to sit in my template until CSW comes out. As a dry library, it blends pretty well--with a bit of work. While I read reactions all over the map on this, I am enjoying the library and have no buyer's remorse. 

And when CSW finally drops, I expect there will be many articulations and instruments in this library that won't be in CSW. 

Do expect a Spitfire Wish List sale in May or June.


----------



## Brian99 (Apr 20, 2019)

TigerTheFrog said:


> Do expect a Spitfire Wish List sale in May or June.


How does the wish list sale work? I've never purchased anything from spitfire so do I need to create an account and add things to my wish list then I'll be offered a discount for each item in the wish list or is it just for specific items?


----------



## brenneisen (Apr 20, 2019)

dzilizzi said:


> We have to find new abbreviations for these things. To me SSWW/SWW/SSW = Spitfire Symphonic Woodwinds. So calling the Studio Woodwinds the same is getting very confusing.
> 
> This goes for the strings as well.


 
https://spitfireaudio.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/360002204133-Table-of-Spitfire-Abbreviations


----------



## MartinH. (Apr 20, 2019)

brenneisen said:


> https://spitfireaudio.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/360002204133-Table-of-Spitfire-Abbreviations



I don't see Studio Woodwinds mentioned there, only Symphonic Woodwinds.


----------



## brenneisen (Apr 20, 2019)

MartinH. said:


> I don't see Studio Woodwinds mentioned there, only Symphonic Woodwinds.



but you see Spitfire Studio Strings, therefore: SStW


----------



## sostenuto (Apr 20, 2019)

bzyboy said:


> How does the wish list sale work? I've never purchased anything from spitfire so do I need to create an account and add things to my wish list then I'll be offered a discount for each item in the wish list or is it just for specific items?



_These days _ a recently extracted tooth under pillow might be enough …._ 

Safer bet is Account and preferences on Wishlist. In past, SFA has provided advance warning and additional items can be added before WL promo begins.


----------



## Reid Rosefelt (Apr 20, 2019)

bzyboy said:


> How does the wish list sale work? I've never purchased anything from spitfire so do I need to create an account and add things to my wish list then I'll be offered a discount for each item in the wish list or is it just for specific items?


Exactly. Create an account and add your favorite things to your wishlist. You don't need to buy anything, but the signup means you'll get their emails. When the wish list sale is about to happen, you'll get an email from Spitfire reminding you to get your Wishlist in order. When it starts, you'll get an email with separate codes for all the stuff on your list, and info on how much of a discount you get. The amount of the discount varies. The most I've seen is 40% off, during the Christmas Wish List.


----------



## dzilizzi (Apr 20, 2019)

And while you're there, pick up some of the great freebies in the Lab section. They are all usable if limited and great sounding.


----------



## Brian99 (Apr 21, 2019)

thanks for all the input! I've made an account and added a few things already


----------



## Apostate (Apr 21, 2019)

My last, very important (to me) question (before actual purchase):

when it comes to solo instruments, would anyone here recommend Spitfire Studio Woodwinds over the Chris Hein solo woodwinds? Over East West Hollywood Woodwinds?

This thread proves what my friends told me: I can get good answers here. Super grateful.


----------



## Karma (Apr 21, 2019)

MartinH. said:


> I don't see Studio Woodwinds mentioned there, only Symphonic Woodwinds.


Whoops, updated


----------



## markleake (Apr 21, 2019)

Apostate said:


> My last, very important (to me) question (before actual purchase):
> 
> when it comes to solo instruments, would anyone here recommend Spitfire Studio Woodwinds over the Chris Hein solo woodwinds? Over East West Hollywood Woodwinds?
> 
> This thread proves what my friends told me: I can get good answers here. Super grateful.


East West will be fine in a mix but exposed as solos, nope, not good.

Look at the Berlin woods (the expansions) or Fluffy Audio woods, if you you want very good performance style solo woodwinds.

I can't comment on Chris Hein & SStW too much, as I don't have either. But if SStW is anything like the symphonic series woods, I wouldn't expect too much from it in terms of very exposed solos... it's not really what they're designed for. Spitfire don't really do their orchestral libraries that way.


----------



## Apostate (Apr 22, 2019)

Just downloaded, and this is an excellent library (core version)! I can't get past the solo instruments, which sound terrific (in a gleaming way). Looking forward to the ensembles as well.


----------



## Michael Stibor (Apr 22, 2019)

Apostate said:


> Man these are some mega-helpful posts, I'm really grateful!!!
> 
> I can see where I'm probably going to want the Professional right off.


Definitely go with the pro version right away. I bought the regular one and kind of regret it. I usually don't futz around too much with mic placement and since I'm used to using VSL for my winds, I was ok with them being tree mics. Or so I thought. I realize now that if they were only going to give one mic option, I wish it had been the close mics, as most piano libraries do on their "lite" versions. The tree mic given is hard to place in a mix I find. A least my mixes.
Sound wise I like everything but the longs. The long are so robotic that I have to use them extremely sparingly or buried in the mix. I use the Hollows more if I need to.


----------



## Apostate (Apr 22, 2019)

mikefrommontreal said:


> Definitely go Pro right away!



Really cool (not sure it's) news! Today Luke from SA told me there would _*definitely*_ be a Wish List sale this May, and when I asked him if my upgrade could get knocked down during the sale he said yes!

That means I'll only pay $120 in May for the upgrade ooOOO yeah!


----------



## CT (Apr 22, 2019)

Apostate said:


> Really cool (not sure it's) news! Today Luke from SA told me there would _*definitely*_ be a Wish List sale this May, and when I asked him if my upgrade could get knocked down during the sale he said yes!
> 
> That means I'll only pay $120 in May for the upgrade ooOOO yeah!



Yeah, I've been waiting for the inevitable Wishlist sale to upgrade my whole package to Pro. Hopefully I'll have the funds together by May.


----------



## Apostate (Apr 22, 2019)

miket said:


> Yeah, I've been waiting for the inevitable Wishlist sale to upgrade my whole package to Pro. Hopefully I'll have the funds together by May.



Oh, I'm thinking ahead! Especially with the advance notice. Very psyched.


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (Apr 22, 2019)

Apostate said:


> That means I'll only pay $120 in May for the upgrade ooOOO yeah!


Will it definitely be a 40% off sale on wishlist items?


----------



## dzilizzi (Apr 22, 2019)

*plugs ears* lalalalala

No, really I think I am mostly done with Spitfire for a while. Albion II was the only thing I had left on my wishlist and I picked it up at 50% off. I mean, how many string libraries does one need?


----------



## NoamL (Apr 22, 2019)

TigerTheFrog said:


> I bought Spitfire Studio Woodwinds, Jr. for $150 to sit in my template until CSW comes out. As a dry library, it blends pretty well--with a bit of work. While I read reactions all over the map on this, I am enjoying the library and have no buyer's remorse.
> 
> And when CSW finally drops, I expect there will be many articulations and instruments in this library that won't be in CSW.
> 
> Do expect a Spitfire Wish List sale in May or June.



Exactly my experience!

It was cheap, it was worth it, it has comprehensive articulations, it's fairly better recorded & programmed than HWW, it's NOT very versatile or emotive for featured wind solos, it's doing good work in my current synthestration template, it's easy and consistent to program, and it will be replaced when CSW comes out. Happy I didn't get the "pro" version as all I would have gained is EHn, contrabassoon and some more mics.


----------



## Apostate (Apr 23, 2019)

NoamL said:


> Exactly my experience!
> 
> It was cheap, it was worth it, it has comprehensive articulations, it's fairly better recorded & programmed than HWW, it's NOT very versatile or emotive for featured wind solos, it's doing good work in my current synthestration template, it's easy and consistent to program, and it will be replaced when CSW comes out. Happy I didn't get the "pro" version as all I would have gained is EHn, contrabassoon and some more mics.



This makes more than one person who's told me all they're waiting for is CSW; to me the only other WW library I want is OT Berlin; SStW, Hein, and EWH cover my needs.

I really like the sparkling sound of the SStW, really crisp on the higher ranges. I think the darker OT WW will complement this library perfectly.

That said, I sure have heard a lot of good things about the CS libraries!


----------



## Apostate (Apr 23, 2019)

So, @Spitfire Team how about starting that Wish List sale a little early this year? 

Looks like you have some purchase-ready folks here


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (Apr 23, 2019)

Apostate said:


> Looks like you have some purchase-ready folks here


Apostate, you mentioned $120 for the Spitfire Studio Woodwinds update, which I believe would be 40% off for this wishlist sale.

I'm wondering if you are guessing this, or if Spitfire told it to you or announced it somewhere.


----------



## HelixK (Apr 23, 2019)

Spitfire Studio Woodwinds for $150 is a steal! A few years ago that would have cost no less than $600 and I'm being generous here.


----------



## Reid Rosefelt (Apr 23, 2019)

Apostate said:


> This makes more than one person who's told me all they're waiting for is CSW; to me the only other WW library I want is OT Berlin; SStW, Hein, and EWH cover my needs.
> 
> I really like the sparkling sound of the SStW, really crisp on the higher ranges. I think the darker OT WW will complement this library perfectly.
> 
> That said, I sure have heard a lot of good things about the CS libraries!


I'm just a hobbyist and have no plans to own a lot of orchestral libraries.

The Cinematic Studio series is very high quality, relatively reasonably priced (quality to price), and most importantly, each library is designed to work seamlessly with the others. So I have CSS, CSP, CSSS, and CSB. That's why I'm waiting for CSW and CSPerc. If Alex ever wants to add anything else to the series, I expect I'll get that too.


----------



## Apostate (Apr 23, 2019)

Land of Missing Parts said:


> Apostate, you mentioned $120 for the Spitfire Studio Woodwinds update, which I believe would be 40% off for this wishlist sale.
> 
> I'm wondering if you are guessing this, or if Spitfire told it to you or announced it somewhere.



I was told there is a sale but you're right, it could be less.

Here's a direct quote from May of last year: Coupon codes up to *40% off single Products* and up to *20% off Collections*".

Link to the topic here: https://vi-control.net/community/th...-your-codes-by-23-59-bst-tonight.71363/page-3


----------



## Apostate (Apr 24, 2019)

miket said:


> I would recommend going for Pro unless you *really* don't need the additional instruments and are completely satisfied with the single Tree 1 mic.



This is becoming more and more interesting to me, as far as "needing" the upgrade. After fooling around with the release CC I'm getting some nice flexibility with the room sound. I also find it odd that there isn't an ensemble instrument for Cor Anglais, which makes this less of a mandatory upgrade as well. What were they thinking here? @Spitfire Team Is there a chance for an upgrade featuring even a two CA patch? Because that would seal the deal on it for me.

I must comment on how charmed I am with the brilliance (i.e. clarity, sheen) of this library. It's like no other I've checked out, and will obviously stand out in the mix quite nicely...perhaps a bit more than the CH WWs.

That said, I agree with the member above, this is mainly an ensemble library for folks whom already have great WW solos. The ensembles are strong enough to justify the 200 US price alone imo.


----------



## Reid Rosefelt (Apr 24, 2019)

The download size of the Studio Woodwinds pro version is 102 GB. 

Can someone share how much space it takes after it is installed?


----------



## Apostate (Apr 24, 2019)

You know, I just mentioned how this was mainly good for ensembles, yet I just went fooling around with the Alto Flute's legato on a fast phrase and _*really*_ liked it!

I've noticed on the clarinets the dynamics slider adds the abovementioned brilliance when moved to the right.


----------



## gpax (Apr 24, 2019)

dzilizzi said:


> I mean, how many string libraries does one need?


Thirty-six.


----------



## CT (Apr 24, 2019)

Apostate said:


> You know, I just mentioned how this was mainly good for ensembles, yet I just went fooling around with the Alto Flute's legato on a fast phrase and _*really*_ liked it!
> 
> I've noticed on the clarinets the dynamics slider adds the abovementioned brilliance when moved to the right.



I should clarify that when I said this library is best suited to ensemble use, I meant woodwinds used in an ensemble context, both solos and unison sections, as opposed to very exposed solo parts or chamber music. The solo instruments in here are definitely very useful!


----------



## Apostate (Apr 24, 2019)

miket said:


> I should clarify that when I said this library is best suited to ensemble use, I meant woodwinds used in an ensemble context, both solos and unison sections, as opposed to very exposed solo parts or chamber music. The solo instruments in here are definitely very useful!



They're sparkly! The only drawback is, when I go back and listen to my specially panned, homemade CH ensembles (out of three clarinets, one is always detuned -0.01) I am shocked to hear how well they hold up against the SStWW.

That said, both libraries are significantly different in tone, for one the Chris Hein are even drier imo.


----------



## Apostate (Apr 25, 2019)

I just got word from Spitfire support that we won't be waiting long for the Wish List sale...can't wait for those extra microphones! I love this library more every day, great sounding stuff imo.


----------



## axb312 (Apr 26, 2019)

@Apostate I have a hard time getting the CH winds to fit in an orchestral context and to sound Berlin'ish'. Any tips? I also feel like flutes are a bit robotic sounding at higher pitches...


----------



## dzilizzi (Apr 26, 2019)

gpax said:


> Thirty-six.


Damn, I have a long way to go. Unless I can count all those 8dio ones separately.....


----------



## Apostate (Apr 28, 2019)

@Spitfire Team is there any chance we might see an update featuring staccatissimo for the clarinets, etc.?

To me the staccatissimo patches are one of the best things about this library (I have to hand it to the alto flutes as well, excellently done imo).

It seems bizarre and perhaps a bit of a cheat not to see this articulation featured in all the instruments.

Hope to hear from you on this, please.

Oh, before I forget, I'm wondering why some instruments include ensemble patches and others don't?

I like this library better every time I use it, however the above things...I can't be the only user whom is weirded out by this...?


----------



## Apostate (Apr 28, 2019)

axb312 said:


> @Apostate I have a hard time getting the CH winds to fit in an orchestral context and to sound Berlin'ish'. Any tips? I also feel like flutes are a bit robotic sounding at higher pitches...



You have to mess with the panning, for one thing. There are resources on the internet that could explain it much better than me.

I also do a trick where, if there are more than two instruments in the ensemble I detune one of them just the tiniest bit. Works for me!


----------



## axb312 (Apr 28, 2019)

Apostate said:


> You have to mess with the panning, for one thing. There are resources on the internet that could explain it much better than me.
> 
> I also do a trick where, if there are more than two instruments in the ensemble I detune one of them just the tiniest bit. Works for me!



How do you get Flute 1 to sound good? I dislike the tone a lot.....:(


----------



## Apostate (Apr 28, 2019)

axb312 said:


> How do you get Flute 1 to sound good? I dislike the tone a lot.....:(



I was talking about the Alto Flute...I'd be surprised if you meant that. Try the legato, but make sure the vibrato slider is off first (this can be super important and a mistake I've left on one too many times).


----------



## axb312 (Apr 28, 2019)

Apostate said:


> I was talking about the Alto Flute...I'd be surprised if you meant that. Try the legato, but make sure the vibrato slider is off first (this can be super important and a mistake I've left on one too many times).



I was actually referring to the Flute 1 in CH Winds .

Would you mind posting some examples from SStW?


----------



## Apostate (Apr 28, 2019)

axb312 said:


> I was actually referring to the Flute 1 in CH Winds .
> 
> Would you mind posting some examples from SStW?



I need to start a Souncloud account, I've just been lazy (messing with my new SStWW too much I guess lol!).

I learned from here it's best to leave off the reverb on the Hein instruments (unfortunately it defaults to 'verb, so it takes some conscientiousness). Leave the body on. Also, you might experiment with a couple of different reverbs.

I personally can't think of a weak link in the Hein woodwinds, though it definitely use some more round robins on the short notes.


----------



## jamwerks (May 2, 2019)

Anyone have an example of SstWW using just the Tree 2 mic?


----------



## re-peat (May 2, 2019)

Jam,

*http://users.telenet.be/re-peat/SStWW_Tree2.mp3 (Here)* are the flute, the oboe, the clarinet and the bassoon, using just the Tree 2 mic. And *http://users.telenet.be/re-peat/SStWW_Tree2_B.mp3 (these)* are the English horn, the bass clarinet, the piccolo and the contrabassoon.

_


----------



## Gerbil (May 2, 2019)

re-peat said:


> Jam,
> 
> *http://users.telenet.be/re-peat/SStWW_Tree2.mp3 (Here)* are the flute, the oboe, the clarinet and the bassoon, using just the Tree 2 mic. And *http://users.telenet.be/re-peat/SStWW_Tree2_B.mp3 (these)* are the English horn, the bass clarinet, the piccolo and the contrabassoon.
> 
> _



This highlights my biggest issue with the studio woodwinds and brass: unnatural attacks in the legato samples. So many of them seem like they're auto fading in the volume.

But I really like the libraries as a whole. I've found they gel very nicely with a lot of different libraries as part of the ensemble.


----------



## ed buller (May 2, 2019)

I have replaced Berlin with these in my template. I still use Berlin for the hecklephone

best

e


----------



## wilifordmusic (May 2, 2019)

Thanks to re-peat for the isolated excerpts. Either you like what you hear or you don't.

Steve


----------



## jamwerks (May 2, 2019)

re-peat said:


> Jam,
> 
> *http://users.telenet.be/re-peat/SStWW_Tree2.mp3 (Here)* are the flute, the oboe, the clarinet and the bassoon, using just the Tree 2 mic. And *http://users.telenet.be/re-peat/SStWW_Tree2_B.mp3 (these)* are the English horn, the bass clarinet, the piccolo and the contrabassoon


A big thanks to you Peat. That sounds usable, so much better that all the other mic combos I've heard elsewhere. I'm struggling with my VSL and others and looking for a replacement until some other (hopefully great) WW libraries come out.

I really like their choice of instruments and arts, and love their gui. This mic sounds like a "mid-mic". In the picture about 3-4 meters back from the instruments iinm. I'm surprised they didn't showcase this more ! And your examples are vert musical Thanks again. Guess I'll be picking this up!


----------



## re-peat (May 2, 2019)

wilifordmusic said:


> ... or you don't.


That's me all over. I really, really don't.
If I didn't have these already and were on the fence, those two audio examples would have me jump off it instantly and never give these winds, one more dreadful than the other, another thought.

_


----------



## jamwerks (May 2, 2019)

re-peat said:


> That's me all over. I really, really don't.
> If I didn't have these already and were on the fence, those two audio examples would have me jump off it instantly and never give this winds, one more dreadful than the other, another thought.


What do you use as your main WW library?


----------



## re-peat (May 3, 2019)

I don’t have any.

Honestly, I don’t like *anything* I have in the woodwinds department: Chris Hein's WW (some clever Kontakt-ideas but mostly poor-sounding, bland source samples; and always very mono), Cinesamples' WW (always sounded more like a first, very rough draft for a library than an actual library to me), VSL (generic sounding, characterless nothingness with a vague hint of dead woodwind to it), Berlin Winds (if only the quality of the Expansion were also that of the core library …), Spitfire’s BML Winds (only so-and-so articulation-wise and, what’s worse, some of those volumes were never properly finished), 8dio Claire (very uneven, inconsistent and having twice as many problems as qualities), …

Nearly all woodwind libraries sound like Lazy Sunday Afternoon projects to me. Or an afterthought. Things you do when your heart’s not really into it. Or a task taken on, somewhat reluctantly, in between bigger projects and approached with only half the focus, budget, effort and commitment than is required, inevitably resulting in second-rate, careless, superficial work which is then dressed up with cheap trickery to make it as presentable as possible.

It’s incomprehensible, I find, that after 25 years of orchestral sampling, with all the technical progress that has been made during that time, and the gazillion orchestral libraries that have been made, there is still not a single decent woodwinds library available. It just doesn’t exist. When it comes to woodwinds, it feels like we're living in a sort of Groundhog Year: every day you wake up, it's still 1997.
Here and there, there are a few isolated patches that I can work with, and sometimes, one of the smaller libraries may contain a nice surprise or two, but by and large, Virtual Woodwind Land, to me, is a dull, barren waste of musically unsatisfying and sonically inferior efforts that will compromise just about every phrase you give to them and every orchestration they’re part of.

_


----------



## Banquet (May 3, 2019)

re-peat said:


> I don’t have any.
> 
> Honestly, I don’t like *anything* I have in the woodwinds department: Chris Hein's WW (some clever Kontakt-ideas but mostly poor-sounding, bland source samples; and always very mono), Cinesamples' WW (always sounded more like a first, very rough draft for a library than an actual library to me), VSL (generic sounding, characterless nothingness with a vague hint of dead woodwind to it), Berlin Winds (if only the quality of the Expansion where also that of the core library …), Spitfire’s BML Winds (only so-and-so articulation-wise and, what’s worse, some of those volumes were never properly finished), 8dio Claire (very uneven, inconsistent and having twice as many problems as qualities), …
> 
> ...



I was going to buy Spitfire Studio Brass and Woodwinds in the Spring Sale but your opinion of them (which I very much respect) has somewhat put me off. I say ‘somewhat’ because I am a beginner looking for a low HD footprint starter library and suspect a lot of what you do not like would not be obvious to me. 

With the above in mind, and at the risk of briefly de-railing this thread, may I ask which brass library you would recommend?


----------



## re-peat (May 3, 2019)

If I had to buy a single, comprehensive library today it would be either Cinematic Studio Brass (my first choice) or Audiobro’s Scoring Brass (still not entirely convinced by this one though). Or the complete collection of Tinto Brass.

Berlin Brass has a lot going for it too — excellent sound and very versatile — , but it’s a fairly unwieldy mammoth of a library and getting it set up just right and make it obey your every wish is not for the faint of heart and requires a powerful, well-equipped machine.

And in the right hands, Andy Blaney’s for instance, Spitfire’s Symphonic Brass sounds as perfect as you could ever dream orchestral samples to sound, but I am not very familiar with the library — I only have one of its predecessors: the BML Horns — and big-sounding cinemascope symphonic stuff is not really my musical cup of tea anyway, so I never went for it.

I would also, beyond any doubt, get SampleModelling’s The Trumpet which I consider a true work of art. Seriously. A *very* rare thing in the world of virtual instruments. (The other SM brass instruments are, unfortunately, not quite in the same league, in my opinion.)

_


----------



## Banquet (May 3, 2019)

Thank you, really appreciate your reply. Cinematic Studio Brass is one I was considering. Only problem is, if I get it, I won’t have enough HD space for the coming woodwind library but I think it’s got to be first choice at the moment and I’ll have to worry about HD space later. Thank you again.


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (May 3, 2019)

I mean I admit that piet has some really valid points as I of the same opinion that wind libraries seem not to get the same love as lets say their string partners, and brass. However, I don´t find that all libraries are per se terrible. They are very limited and so you have to find ways to surpass their limitations. I don´t say that I am good with that, but I try to find ways. For instance this small excerpt was done only with berlin Woodwinds legacy here.

I am no midi mockup expert so forgive me that I dont meet the standards some people might have how sampled woodwinds should or have to sound like. There is a direct a/b comparison.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/cbi84t35x3gto37/Comparison_A_B.mp3?dl=0


----------



## Cat (May 3, 2019)

How many dynamic layers does the Spitfire Studio Woodwinds (longs and legatos) have? How about the Brass? I couldn’t fund this info anywhere so I am asking owners of thee libs...


----------



## jamwerks (May 3, 2019)

I too am a bit frustrated at the lack of a truly great (at any price) Woodwind library. I don't have CH, but pretty much all the others. Seems this SstWW might be the best while waiting for the next generation of libraries. I'm looking for orchestral winds, and this Tree 2 mic (with verb) might work.

There's probably less money for devs in Woodwinds. I have high hopes for CSW, Century Woodwinds (assuming there will be one), AudioBro, & an eventual new OT winds library.

I was at first stunned by the choice of the room for this Spitfire line, but I think the choice was probably not to compete with their SSW & SSB line, so a markedly "small" sound. I'm hoping maybe SF will also do another high profile orchestral line in a new medium-size room, we'll see...


----------



## ism (May 3, 2019)

On black Friday 2017 I believe Christian mention that AIR had been booked to record more samples for a (free, I think) update to SSW. So still hoping to hear more about that.


----------



## Consona (May 3, 2019)

I have Fluffy Audio Flute and Embertone Clarinet and think they are quite fine. They can deliver pretty vivid phrases.


----------



## jamwerks (May 3, 2019)

ism said:


> On black Friday 2017 I believe Christian mention that AIR had been booked to record more samples for a (free, I think) update to SSW. So still hoping to hear more about that.


My speculation is that when all the older Sf librairies (SSW & others) come out on their new player, that will happen with some new content. Unfortunately for me, SSW & SSB are just too ambient for the orchestral sound I like.


----------



## CT (May 3, 2019)

jamwerks said:


> I was at first stunned by the choice of the room for this Spitfire line, but I think the choice was probably not to compete with their SSW & SSB line, so a markedly "small" sound. I'm hoping maybe SF will also do another high profile orchestral line in a new medium-size room, we'll see...



I would like to have heard the Studio series done at British Grove. The sound of Orchestral Swarm makes me think I would have preferred that to Air 1.


----------



## Reid Rosefelt (May 3, 2019)

re-peat said:


> I don’t have any.
> 
> Honestly, I don’t like *anything* I have in the woodwinds department: Chris Hein's WW (some clever Kontakt-ideas but mostly poor-sounding, bland source samples; and always very mono), Cinesamples' WW (always sounded more like a first, very rough draft for a library than an actual library to me), VSL (generic sounding, characterless nothingness with a vague hint of dead woodwind to it), Berlin Winds (if only the quality of the Expansion were also that of the core library …), Spitfire’s BML Winds (only so-and-so articulation-wise and, what’s worse, some of those volumes were never properly finished), 8dio Claire (very uneven, inconsistent and having twice as many problems as qualities), …
> 
> ...


The Fluffy Audio Solo Woodwinds Bundle is not a full Woodwind library, it's just solo Flute, Clarinet, Oboe and Bassoon. They are all named for the players who were sampled, so they each have real personality.

The John Diamenti Fox Clarinet has been justly praised as one of the best clarinet VIs out there. 
The flute is almost as good IMHO. The oboe and the bassoon have lovely tone and are just as playable, but have limited articulations, compared to the other two.

Something to consider.

If you buy just one to try them out, they offer a great deal on the rest. You just pay the difference.


----------



## Apostate (May 3, 2019)

jamwerks said:


> I too am a bit frustrated at the lack of a truly great (at any price) Woodwind library. I don't have CH



Then you might want to grab the Hein. Whenever you have the mind. Imo it's really excellent, you just need to have a decent reverb to go with it.

As for me, as I mentioned I wanted to grab the Pro upgrade this Monday but after writing a bunch with Core (and listening to Re-peat and the walkthroughs) I'm wondering if the extra mics really _*are*_ worth it.

I mean, I've had the Hein for awhile now and have done just fine with the one...I should also mention that I've put the Studio Woodwinds core through some serious paces and am at this point just not entirely sure I need the extras.

I know, I know, some supposedly hotshot dude here with 3,000 likes says I get more "dimensions"...meh. I'm doing really well with just the tree.

Maybe I'll just stick to Core and make up for the rest with the Hein. I substitute the SStW oboe and bassoon with the Hein...it's barely a problem at all.


----------



## Banquet (May 3, 2019)

Apostate said:


> Then you might want to grab the Hein. Whenever you have the mind. Imo it's really excellent, you just need to have a decent reverb to go with it.
> 
> As for me, as I mentioned I wanted to grab the Pro upgrade this Monday but after writing a bunch with Core (and listening to Re-peat and the walkthroughs) I'm wondering if the extra mics really _*are*_ worth it.
> 
> ...



Are you pretty happy with the Core libraries?


----------



## Apostate (May 3, 2019)

Banquet said:


> Are you pretty happy with the Core libraries?



That's pretty much what I wrote


----------



## CT (May 3, 2019)

Apostate said:


> I'm wondering if the extra mics really _*are*_ worth it.



It's a tough call, but you know what your music needs. Tree 1 just has too much room in it for me, but the main appeal of the Pro versions are the additional instruments. Divisi strings, solo trombones, etc. I need those more than additional mic positions.

That said, I don't think I'll be doing the Pro upgrade during this Wish List after all. I have to sort out my actual intentions and needs before spending money....


----------



## jorjazz (May 4, 2019)

Hi everyone. Can someone confirm or deny if there is an actual double tongue in sstb and Sstw? In Paul’s vids he says double, triple, quadruple, but my ears hear triple,quad, and quintuplets. So very surprised I haven’t seen a mention of this anywhere, Thanks in advance, as I gear up for Monday’s sale.


----------



## Consona (May 4, 2019)

jorjazz said:


> Hi everyone. Can someone confirm or deny if there is an actual double tongue in sstb and Sstw? In Paul’s vids he says double, triple, quadruple, but my ears hear triple,quad, and quintuplets. So very surprised I haven’t seen a mention of this anywhere, Thanks in advance, as I gear up for Monday’s sale.


Hello! The manuals say they contain double, but even if not, you can use time machine patches to tweak the shorts to make doubles no problem, IMO.

I really miss time machine patches in other libraries, I'd love to have them in CineBrass for example.



Gerbil said:


> This highlights my biggest issue with the studio woodwinds and brass: unnatural attacks in the legato samples.


Interesting that their chamber strings legato sounds so good.


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 4, 2019)

Apostate said:


> I know, I know, some supposedly hotshot dude here with 3,000 likes says I get more "dimensions"...meh. I'm doing really well with just the tree.
> 
> Maybe I'll just stick to Core and make up for the rest with the Hein.



Uhhh, somehow I get the sinking feeling he (or she) might mean me. Except, I'm not even supposedly hotshot...more like shot dead lol!

I would really be grateful to anyone whom owns the Professional to tell me how much the mics help with things. I know there are extra, necessary instruments in the Pro vs. Core, but I'm wondering how much of an advantage the extra mics allow in this library, please.

I've been experimenting with this library at a friend's house and really like it (the tree mic sounds quite good imo), however he only has Core so I'm extra curious before slapping zee moolah down on Pro this Monday.


----------



## re-peat (May 4, 2019)

I'll make you an example moving from one mic to the next, Pars. Any particular instrument you like to hear this with?

_


----------



## jamwerks (May 4, 2019)

re-peat said:


> I'll make you an example moving from one mic to the next, Pars. Any particular instrument you like to hear this with?
> 
> _


I'd love to here what you posted above with the Tree 2 mic, treated with your favorite reverb for an orchestral setting, so a bigger room sound than it was recorded in...


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 4, 2019)

re-peat said:


> I'll make you an example moving from one mic to the next, Pars. Any particular instrument you like to hear this with?
> 
> _



I'd appreciate the alto flute close and outriggers (both solo'd and alone). I'm extremely grateful for this, re-peat.


----------



## re-peat (May 4, 2019)

*Pars,*

Coming up.

- - -

*Jam,*

I’ll have to make a new example using a different mic, because, to my ears, the Tree mics generate spatial information that goes completely AGAINST anything that needs to fit a more spacious, orchestral setting.
These Tree mics contain an unignorable suggestion of confinement, and confinement is the very thing we do NOT want when going orchestral. (That’s also the very reason why I will *always* reduce ER’s in a reverb that needs to suggest big spaces.)

I’ll check if one of the other mic’s is better suited to become part of a more spacious illusion that would match with an orchestra. There’s bound to be one that’ll work.

Something else though: my tool of choice for doing this type of stuff (transporting sounds into an orchestral space) would be Ircam SPAT, so I’m not sure if my excercise will be all that helpful since very few people have SPAT … But I’ll give it go anyway.

_


----------



## Apostate (May 4, 2019)

re-peat said:


> I’ll have to make a new example using a different mic, because, to my ears, the Tree mics generate spatial information that goes completely AGAINST anything that needs to fit a more spacious, orchestral setting.
> These Tree mics contain an unignorable suggestion of confinement, and confinement is the very thing we do NOT want when going orchestral. (That’s also the very reason why I will *always* reduce ER’s in a reverb that needs to suggest big spaces.)
> 
> I’ll check if one of the other mic’s is better suited to become part of a more spacious illusion that would match with an orchestra. There’s bound to be one that’ll work.
> ...



This really helps me, thanks so much.


----------



## jamwerks (May 4, 2019)

To my ears the Tree 2 has that stage sound. In the production picture you can see that the players are lined-up against the back wall, which is kind-of too bad imo, but I hear very little left-right confinement (something I hear way too much of in the other mics). If I buy the Pro version, it will be to use that mic and try to fit it into a larger room…

Peat, could you send me your mp3 from above, and I'll try that here on my own?


----------



## re-peat (May 4, 2019)

*Jam*, here's the *link to the AIFF-files* of the examples I posted earlier. (Better to work with than mp3's.)

*Pars*, here's the Alto Flute, heard through 4 mic. perspectives:
(1) *http://users.telenet.be/re-peat/SStWW_AltoFlute_1_Close1.mp3 (Close 1)*
(2) *http://users.telenet.be/re-peat/SStWW_AltoFlute_2_Close2.mp3 (Close 2)*
(3) *http://users.telenet.be/re-peat/SStWW_AltoFlute_3_Ambient.mp3 (Ambient)*
(4) *http://users.telenet.be/re-peat/SStWW_AltoFlute_4_Outrigger.mp3 (Outriggers)*

_


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 4, 2019)

re-peat said:


> *Jam*, here's the *link to the AIFF-files* of the examples I posted earlier. (Better to work with than mp3's.)
> 
> *Pars*, here's the Alto Flute, heard through 4 mic. perspectives:
> (1) *http://users.telenet.be/re-peat/SStWW_AltoFlute_1_Close1.mp3 (Close 1)*
> ...



This is enormously helpful, thanks!

Really liking the gritty detail of the close mics. You took care to showcase the releases , thanks so much for the attention to detail.

At this point I'm really liking it. I didn't ask for oboe and bassoon samples, because from what I've heard both on and offline those are the most glaring weaknesses in that library.


----------



## CT (May 4, 2019)

I think the bassoons hold up, although the vibrato has to be handled with care. The oboes are indeed a bit dodgy, unfortunately.


----------



## markleake (May 4, 2019)

re-peat said:


> *Jam*, here's the *link to the AIFF-files* of the examples I posted earlier. (Better to work with than mp3's.)
> 
> *Pars*, here's the Alto Flute, heard through 4 mic. perspectives:
> (1) *http://users.telenet.be/re-peat/SStWW_AltoFlute_1_Close1.mp3 (Close 1)*
> ...


Very much appreciated. Close 2 and Outrigger mics sound much better than the Tree mic examples you put up before.

I know the library is going to be a little limited, but these sound plenty good enough for me to consider getting the library. The quandary is all those mics and all that hard drive space taken up with mics I don't want or need.

I wish they'd offer a cheaper choice for just one mic, but a mic you can **choose**.


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 5, 2019)

markleake said:


> hose mics and all that hard drive space taken up with mics I don't want or need.
> 
> I wish they'd offer a cheaper choice for just one mic, but a mic you can **choose**.



Let me guess, one of those close mics, Mark?


----------



## jamwerks (May 5, 2019)

Yeah I'm still undecided about the mic's, but probably worth getting at the reduced price. On the product page they also list 2 mic mixes, though I haven't heard any talk about that. Thanks again to @re-peat!


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 5, 2019)

jamwerks said:


> Yeah I'm still undecided about the mic's, but probably worth getting at the reduced price. On the product page they also list 2 mic mixes, though I haven't heard any talk about that. Thanks again to @re-peat!



At 120 US for an upgrade...sounds like a pretty damn good deal imo. 

I still have SSW in my WL as well...but I think I might wait on that one (get it for sure for Black Friday though, mostly to fit in with my other WWs).


----------



## markleake (May 5, 2019)

Parsifal666 said:


> Let me guess, one of those close mics, Mark?


Depends, Close 2 is what I'd choose I think. But I also recall the alternative Tree mics sounded good on something I listened to a while ago. It had far less room tone, which was a big plus... I don't like the boxy room sound that I hear in the main Tree mics. It's an academic exercise, but it does remind me why I originally skipped the idea of getting the core version of this series... they all use the mic I liked the least.


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 5, 2019)

markleake said:


> Depends, Close 2 is what I'd choose I think. But I also recall the alternative Tree mics sounded good on something I listened to a while ago. It had far less room tone, which was a big plus... I don't like the boxy room sound that I hear in the main Tree mics. It's an academic exercise, but it does remind me why I originally skipped the idea of getting the core version of this series... they all use the mic I liked the least.



Though I do like the Decca mic, re-peat sold me on those close (and the outriggers aren't shabby either imo).

I was personally on the fence in regard to needing the extra mics in Professional (not to mention having a fine Cor Anglais and Contrabassoon in the Hein library). Those mp3s convinced me I'm significantly better off with the Pro...especially at the forthcoming price.


----------



## Loïc D (May 5, 2019)

I have SStW Pro and yes, the extra mics are worth it. I don’t really like the Tree mics. I might even choose different mics on different instruments to find the sound I’m looking for.

I also have SStB basic, not Pro, and I don’t really like the sound of Tree mic, it sounds too thin on brass for me. Room is an important component of a brass sound.
Can someone confirm that the Pro extra mics are also a most welcome addition for SStB ? I’d jump the gun of wish list sale.


----------



## re-peat (May 5, 2019)

I'll do you a few examples, LowweeK.

_


----------



## re-peat (May 5, 2019)

Here's the French Horn 2, staccato only (to better hear the space, said Grandmother), through 4 mic sets: *http://users.telenet.be/re-peat/SstBrass_Horn2_4Mics.mp3 ((1) Tree2 (2) Ambient (3) Outriggers (4) Close2)*.
If you wanna hear any of the other instruments, or other mics or mixes or whatever, let me know.

_


----------



## Loïc D (May 5, 2019)

@re-peat : Thank you so much. It's very informative and we are blessed to have so many sond options. Each mic has a real character.

If you don't mind, I'd like to hear either Tuba or Cymbasso, for which I think the sole Tree mic lacks body or ooomph. Short excerpt with staccato would be perfect.


----------



## re-peat (May 5, 2019)

LowweeK said:


> either Tuba or Cymbasso


Or both? *http://users.telenet.be/re-peat/SstBrass_Cibasso&Tuba_4Mics.mp3 (Here's)* a phrase the first half of which is played by the Cimbasso, the second half by the Tuba (and the last bar by the two of them together). The whole thing is repeated 4 times, using the same mic's (in the same order) as in the Horn example.

_


----------



## jaketanner (May 5, 2019)

Apostate said:


> I just got word from Spitfire support that we won't be waiting long for the Wish List sale...can't wait for those extra microphones! I love this library more every day, great sounding stuff imo.



Any idea how long they give you to buy once they announce the sale?


----------



## dzilizzi (May 5, 2019)

jaketanner said:


> Any idea how long they give you to buy once they announce the sale?


Based on the Xmas sales, it is usually about a week.


----------



## jaketanner (May 5, 2019)

dzilizzi said:


> Based on the Xmas sales, it is usually about a week.



Just announced. May 12th. Very cool. Thanks!


----------



## axb312 (May 5, 2019)

AlexanderSchiborr said:


> I mean I admit that piet has some really valid points as I of the same opinion that wind libraries seem not to get the same love as lets say their string partners, and brass. However, I don´t find that all libraries are per se terrible. They are very limited and so you have to find ways to surpass their limitations. I don´t say that I am good with that, but I try to find ways. For instance this small excerpt was done only with berlin Woodwinds legacy here.
> 
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/j64bokpysjilv6m/Tschaikowsky_Dance_of_the_reed_Flutes_v2.mp3?dl=0
> 
> ...



What is this AB comparison between? Berlin woodwinds and ...?


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (May 5, 2019)

axb312 said:


> What is this AB comparison between? Berlin woodwinds and ...?



and live recording.


----------



## Loïc D (May 5, 2019)

re-peat said:


> Or both? *http://users.telenet.be/re-peat/SstBrass_Cibasso&Tuba_4Mics.mp3 (Here's)* a phrase the first half of which is played by the Cimbasso, the second half by the Tuba (and the last bar by the two of them together). The whole thing is repeated 4 times, using the same mic's (in the same order) as in the Horn example.
> 
> _


Thanks again. I like those sounds far better than the Tree mics, specially Decca & Ambient.
Saving now for the Pro extension...


----------



## jaketanner (May 6, 2019)

For those that have gone from Studio Woodwinds core to the Professional version, is there a huge difference? other than the additional instruments of course...but do the additional mics truly make a difference in the way they sit within a composition?...debating if it's worth the extra $120 fro Pro.. Thanks.


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 6, 2019)

jaketanner said:


> For those that have gone from Studio Woodwinds core to the Professional version, is there a huge difference? other than the additional instruments of course...but do the additional mics truly make a difference in the way they sit within a composition?...debating if it's worth the extra $120 fro Pro.. Thanks.



I just upgraded and YES. As re-peat showed, the close and outrigger mics are excellent, with the former especially trumping the Core decca/tree mic in no uncertain terms. I wrote this whole woodwind choir piece while I was waiting with the Core (yes, it's my usual offal, but I'm trying lol!) and when I moved the instruments to the close 1 and 2 with just a dash of outrigger the difference was powerful (to say the least). Things opened up in a much more pleasing...I hate to say realistic (it's kind of a loaded term around these parts) way. You get much more of the warts-included sound, totally necessary if you're trying for any kind of quasi-"authentic" sound imo.

I'd upload a sample but I suck both at composition and exporting, so forgive me. It's probably best to rely on re-peat's samples from earlier, because for all intents and purposes they provided me the impetus to upgrade in the first place.

At 120 US the upgrade is beyond a no-brainer (well, unless you're selling your first born for it, in which case I would first make sure the kid is worth it).


----------



## jaketanner (May 6, 2019)

Parsifal666 said:


> I just upgraded and YES. As re-peat showed, the close and outrigger mics are excellent, with the former especially trumping the Core decca/tree mic in no uncertain terms. I wrote this whole woodwind choir piece while I was waiting with the Core (yes, it's my usual offal, but I'm trying lol!) and when I moved the instruments to the close 1 and 2 with just a dash of outrigger the difference was powerful (to say the least). Things opened up in a much more pleasing...I hate to say realistic (it's kind of a loaded term around these parts) way. You get much more of the warts-included sound, totally necessary if you're trying for any kind of quasi-"authentic" sound imo.
> 
> I'd upload a sample but I suck both at composition and exporting, so forgive me. It's probably best to rely on re-peat's samples from earlier, because for all intents and purposes they provided me the impetus to upgrade in the first place.
> 
> At 120 US the upgrade is beyond a no-brainer (well, unless you're selling your first born for it, in which case I would first make sure the kid is worth it).



Thanks...going to check out those samples.


----------



## jamwerks (May 6, 2019)

After treating @re-peat examples of the Tree 2 mic above, I'm come to the conclusion that it doesn't work well to my ears for a Scoring Stage orchestral sound. Maybe the Outriggers would work better in that context?


----------



## axb312 (May 6, 2019)

Parsifal666 said:


> I just upgraded and YES. As re-peat showed, the close and outrigger mics are excellent, with the former especially trumping the Core decca/tree mic in no uncertain terms. I wrote this whole woodwind choir piece while I was waiting with the Core (yes, it's my usual offal, but I'm trying lol!) and when I moved the instruments to the close 1 and 2 with just a dash of outrigger the difference was powerful (to say the least). Things opened up in a much more pleasing...I hate to say realistic (it's kind of a loaded term around these parts) way. You get much more of the warts-included sound, totally necessary if you're trying for any kind of quasi-"authentic" sound imo.
> 
> I'd upload a sample but I suck both at composition and exporting, so forgive me. It's probably best to rely on re-peat's samples from earlier, because for all intents and purposes they provided me the impetus to upgrade in the first place.
> 
> At 120 US the upgrade is beyond a no-brainer (well, unless you're selling your first born for it, in which case I would first make sure the kid is worth it).



How about Mix 1 and Mix 2? Are these any good?


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 6, 2019)

jamwerks said:


> After treating @re-peat examples of the Tree 2 mic above, I'm come to the conclusion that it doesn't work well to my ears for a Scoring Stage orchestral sound. Maybe the Outriggers would work better in that context?



Well, these are dry samples, so coupled with other dry, orchestral libraries and a good reverb on the bus would go a long way toward achieving that sound.

If you're not interested in putting a little engineering work (the reverb) then the SSWW might be more to your liking. More out of the box, and of course they also work well with the others in the Symphonic series (Albions, too).


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 6, 2019)

Oh hey guys I should share this, too: I've been going happily crazy (in anticipation of the new WW library) by listening to the great wind quintets and choirs by heavies like Poulenc, Perle, Mozart, Nielsen, Hindemith, Ligeti, and Strauss. I highly recommend checking the works of these men out in the genre, as they can be monumentally inspiring.


----------



## Loïc D (May 6, 2019)

My 2 cents : it’s worth.
The extra instruments are useful and the extra mics open new sonic territories as well.
For $120, it’s quite a steal.


----------



## re-peat (May 6, 2019)

I don’t wanna ruin the festivities here, but NOTHING I showed in any of my examples qualifies as excellent in my book ("not bad" is already a much too kind and forgiving view, if you ask me), and I certainly didn’t want to give rise to the idea that there is anything of excellence in these libraries. 

I’ve kept my views on the Studio Series out of the last three pages of this thread, but if anything, I think even less of them now then I did before. While I was preparing those examples, the thought that most often crossed my mind, and I'm dead serious here, was that the *only* way these libraries would deserve some appreciation, was if they had been marketed as “My First Woodwinds Library” and “My First Brass Library” and aimed at 5-year olds. Any human intelligence more mature and educated than a 5-year old, and not completely devoid of the gift of music, is bound, I would think, to be hugely disappointed, frustrated and deeply annoyed by these libraries.

Anything you do with these things — trust me: _anything_ — sounds as if played by a third-rate provincial school-orchestra equipped with cheap instruments. (Without the realism of course.) Articulations don’t connect, it is impossible to suggest even the faintest hint of commitment or suitable musicality in a performance with any of the instruments, the sounds don’t blend, the vibrato sounds (and is) artificial, some of the timbres are downright unpleasant, the dynamics are absent or wrong … the list is endless. Well, not endless, but painfully, painfully long.

And I fully understand Jamwerks: I have to admit defeat as well trying to create the illusion of a larger, more orchestral space around these samples. (Which is why I never posted any of my results.) With SPAT, I usually can do that, quite convincingly, within 5 seconds. But whatever I tried with these samples, it never sounded as it supposed to sound, no matter what mic perspective I started with. There’s a *very* obnoxious room-element in all of the microphones, I find, which stands in the way of a believable larger-size spatialization. There's bound to be a mix perspective that'll work, I said on the previous page, well: there isn't.

And finally, personally, I really wouldn’t urge people too much to start listening to some of the great classic woodwind music that’s been written and recorded. At least, it would be extremely unkind to the people who purchased the Studio Woodwinds, cause it’s only going to make their frustration and anger — upon realizing what baffling musical incompetence and ridiculousness their purchase amounts to — much bigger and more tormenting.
A much kinder and more compassionate thing to give to those who have purchased (or are about to purchase) the Studio Woodwinds and/or Brass, is to have their brains partially fried, so that it functions at about the same level as that of a 5-year old. That’s really the only way I see to keep the customer satisfied.

_


----------



## ism (May 6, 2019)

re-peat said:


> I don’t wanna ruin the festivities here, but NOTHING I showed in any of my examples qualifies as excellent in my book ("not bad" is already a much too kind and forgiving view, if you ask me), and I certainly didn’t want to give rise to the idea that there is anything of excellence in these libraries.
> 
> I’ve kept my views on the Studio Series out of the last three pages of this thread, but if anything, I think even less of them now then I did before. While I was preparing those examples, the thought that most often crossed my mind, and I'm dead serious here, was that the *only* way these libraries would deserve some appreciation, was if they had been marketed as “My First Woodwinds Library” and “My First Brass Library” and aimed at 5-year olds. Any human intelligence more mature and educated than a 5-year old, and not completely devoid of the gift of music, is bound, I would think, to be hugely disappointed, frustrated and deeply annoyed by these libraries.
> 
> ...




I really do appreciate the expertise and skill you bring to this discussion (and I'm in no way ever suggestion that your opinions here aren't genuinely held), on this and on many other threads.

But while personally, I have no problem being considered a 5-year old in relation to one of your skill and experience (in the same way that I don't really mind being considered "dumber that Einstein"), I wonder if you discount the fact that other people - perhaps more talented that myself and perhaps not going for quite the same sound as yourself - might take offence at being dismissed as 5 year olds?

I mean to suggest this respectfully, for let me reiterate, that I really do value your critiques on these pages, even if I could wish they were sometime a bit better contextualized.


----------



## Denkii (May 6, 2019)

Ouch.


----------



## Tekkera (May 6, 2019)

re-peat said:


> I don’t wanna ruin the festivities here, but NOTHING I showed in any of my examples qualifies as excellent in my book ("not bad" is already a much too kind and forgiving view, if you ask me), and I certainly didn’t want to give rise to the idea that there is anything of excellence in these libraries.
> 
> I’ve kept my views on the Studio Series out of the last three pages of this thread, but if anything, I think even less of them now then I did before. While I was preparing those examples, the thought that most often crossed my mind, and I'm dead serious here, was that the *only* way these libraries would deserve some appreciation, was if they had been marketed as “My First Woodwinds Library” and “My First Brass Library” and aimed at 5-year olds. Any human intelligence more mature and educated than a 5-year old, and not completely devoid of the gift of music, is bound, I would think, to be hugely disappointed, frustrated and deeply annoyed by these libraries.
> 
> ...


Hot opinion


----------



## jbuhler (May 6, 2019)

Working my way through the Studio Brass Pro. A few small issues. I don't find the library terrible in the least. Indeed I'd say it is better than not bad in itself, though some patches are better than others. I haven't worked it into context yet, and I can't yet say if it will work as a complement to SSB as I hope. It's nice to have so many muted articulations, something SSB is somewhat lacking in. I've liked what I've heard noodling around with the euphonium legato patch, and some of the mics seem to draw out an agreeable roughness in the playing that could be useful for certain passages.


----------



## re-peat (May 6, 2019)

ism said:


> I really do appreciate the expertise and skill you bring to this discussion (and I'm in no way ever suggestion that your opinions here aren't genuinely held), on this and on many other threads.
> 
> But while personally, I have no problem being considered a 5-year old in relation to one of your skill and experience (in the same way that I don't really mind being considered "dumber that Einstein"), I wonder if you discount the fact that other people - perhaps more talented that myself and perhaps not going for quite the same sound as yourself - might take offence at being dismissed as 5 year olds?
> 
> I mean to suggest this respectfully, for let me reiterate, that I really do value your critiques on these pages, even if I could wish they were sometime a bit better contextualized.




You appear to have the reading skills of a 3-year old, Ism. Nowhere in my post did I equate any or all of the current or future users of the Studio Series with 5-year olds. I merely suggested that we would see more happy faces among those users if they were (or had the brains of) 5-year olds.

__


----------



## Denkii (May 6, 2019)

Me and my popcorn are ready.


----------



## ism (May 6, 2019)

re-peat said:


> You appear to have the reading skills of a 3-year old, Ism. Nowhere in my post did I equate any or all of the current or future users of the Studio Series with 5-year olds. I merely suggested that we would see more happy faces among those users if they were (or had the brains of) 5-year olds.
> 
> __



Only in the most absolutely ploddingly literal reading. Human language simply doesn’t work like that. It has context. It’s hairsplitting to pretend otherwise.

My point stands, i’ve gone to great effort to express it politely and respectfully. Feel free to disagree, but please everyone let’s put away the popcorn.


----------



## chillbot (May 6, 2019)

re-peat said:


> You appear to have the reading skills of a 3-year old, Ism. Nowhere in my post did I equate any or all of the current or future users of the Studio Series with 5-year olds. I merely suggested that we would see more happy faces among those users if they were (or had the brains of) 5-year olds.


I get the pattern! Can I be 1-year-old next?


----------



## jamwerks (May 6, 2019)

I get the feeling that some here can be swayed by just one or two persons comments. Imo this is still a high quality WW library. If I didn't own about 6 of them, I'd definitely be interested. There are tons of arts, more than complete instrument selection, and their great Gui.

For a first or second library this is a no-brainer imo. And if I did also some smaller ensemble work with WW solos, this also really fits the bill...


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 6, 2019)

I love the library. To each his (or her) own.


----------



## gussunkri (May 6, 2019)

re-peat said:


> the vibrato sounds (and is) artificial, [...], the dynamics are absent or wrong



Do you mean this literally? Are you saying that the vibrato is generated by a LFO and pitch-shifting, rather than being recorded? When you say that the dynamics are absent, are you saying that they only recorded one dynamic layer? I only own WW core, and I am not at the studio so I cannot check for myself, but I would be very surprised if these claims were true.


----------



## Zero&One (May 6, 2019)

@re-peat should review every product! I'd even pay for a compilation book of past reviews

My ribs are sore with laughing!


----------



## dzilizzi (May 6, 2019)

jamwerks said:


> I get the feeling that some here can be swayed by just one or two persons comments. Imo this is still a high quality WW library. If I didn't own about 6 of them, I'd definitely be interested. There are tons of arts, more than complete instrument selection, and their great Gui.
> 
> For a first or second library this is a no-brainer imo. And if I did also some smaller ensemble work with WW solos, this also really fits the bill...


The problem for someone like me who is just learning, when you hear various comments like that, you do think twice. If someone with experience can't make it sound good, I definitely can't. And? I have a lot of WW libraries. The oboes are usually the questionable one for me. Always sounds like a pipe organ. Though that might not be a bad thing.


----------



## Tekkera (May 6, 2019)

re-peat said:


> You appear to have the reading skills of a 3-year old, Ism. Nowhere in my post did I equate any or all of the current or future users of the Studio Series with 5-year olds. I merely suggested that we would see more happy faces among those users if they were (or had the brains of) 5-year olds.
> 
> __


Haha, great post man! That was pretty funny, but april fools was quite a while ago now


----------



## Denkii (May 6, 2019)

dzilizzi said:


> The problem for someone like me who is just learning, when you hear various comments like that, you do think twice. If someone with experience can't make it sound good, I definitely can't. And? I have a lot of WW libraries. The oboes are usually the questionable one for me. Always sounds like a pipe organ. Though that might not be a bad thing.


On one hand I can see the problem you're describing and I agree to some extent.
On the other hand: If I hear something and believe it sounds good and I want it, that's enough validation for me.


----------



## jamwerks (May 6, 2019)

dzilizzi said:


> The problem for someone like me who is just learning, when you hear various comments like that, you do think twice. If someone with experience can't make it sound good, I definitely can't. And? I have a lot of WW libraries. The oboes are usually the questionable one for me. Always sounds like a pipe organ. Though that might not be a bad thing.


This is a perfect library for someone getting a start (and not just), something worth having in your pallet. My quibbles with it are specific to my usage and my taste. If you generally like what you hear, then go for it!


----------



## jaketanner (May 6, 2019)

jamwerks said:


> This is a perfect library for someone getting a start (and not just), something worth having in your pallet. My quibbles with it are specific to my usage and my taste. If you generally like what you hear, then go for it!



I am not a working composer at the moment, but do want a wind library that will stand up to pro work...without breaking the bank, what would you suggest? I already have 8Dio's solo winds. Thanks.


----------



## jamwerks (May 6, 2019)

@jaketanner I also have the Claire Woodwinds & have quite using them, but that's another story...

In your shoes I'd listen closely to all the examples you can find, and then make your judgements, without paying (much) attention to what you might read here.

The price counts also, and these are extremely low prices for the content you're getting!


----------



## StillLife (May 6, 2019)

Tekkera said:


> Haha, great post man! That was pretty funny, but april fools was quite a while ago now


I think, Re-Peat, that many things in life would be met with much more happiness if we all had the brains of a five-year old. Probably also with more anxiety, but that's beside the point here.


----------



## jaketanner (May 6, 2019)

jamwerks said:


> @jaketanner I also have the Claire Woodwinds & have quite using them, but that's another story...
> 
> In your shoes I'd listen closely to all the examples you can find, and then make your judgements, without paying (much) attention to what you might read here.
> 
> The price counts also, and these are extremely low prices for the content you're getting!



Well for the core library, it's almost a no-brainer at less than $120...but to have the additional instruments would be nice...especially the bass instruments. Not so much concerned about the mics, although they do make a big difference as well. Just wanted to know if there were other alternatives within the sale price range I should be looking at.


----------



## ism (May 6, 2019)

dzilizzi said:


> when you hear various comments like that, you do think twice. If someone with experience can't make it sound good, I definitely can't.



There's a converse to this also - sometimes it takes experience to make something sound bad. re-peat's (similarly savage) critique of SStS, for instance, was helpful. He provides a penetrating insight into the limitations of library. But it took me quite a bit of effort to even reproduce (some of) them. Wheres my own experience is that on the whole it's wonderful $200 library. To be clear, there is no accusation of bad faith, here. Library makers generally don't go out of their way to foreground the spaces in which the library sounds truly bad, so more experienced people able to immediately hone in on these no-go zones in the palette of a library are genuinely helpful.

So in this sense, was my own failure to make the library sound bad a consequence of my the limitations of skill own level and my (by comparison) 5-year old brain? Sure, you can put it like that if you like if you like. Why not.

And would I like to shift my main string library to something more deeply sampled (and more expensive) within, hopefully a couple of year if all goes well? Absolutely. But for now, I'm loving the sounds I can make with SStS, and am over the moon to be able to get into this kind of aesthetic space for $200. (And I'm also glad I bought it before I read the negative death spiral of negative reviews, which don't seem to be terribly relevant to my own experience).

So I'm grateful to have access to this level of (even rather savage) professional critique that the above represents. My only point is that, for many of us here, it really needs to be contextualized to be helpful. 

That's say, you're probably right about the SStW oboe though - certainly for exposed lyrical passages, it's clearly not sampled to the level of the (immensely beautiful) oboe in SSW, or OTWW exp B. Of course the oboe in the latter alone in effect costs almost as much at the 13 instruments in SStW. So for most of us, price is a relevant bit of context.


----------



## ism (May 6, 2019)

jaketanner said:


> I am not a working composer at the moment, but do want a wind library that will stand up to pro work...without breaking the bank, what would you suggest? I already have 8Dio's solo winds. Thanks.



That's an interesting question, maybe one that merits a separate thread.

I've been - slowly - figuring out how to mix a few of the Claire instrument with SSW so that the Claire can take over in those more lyrical moments that go beyond the lyrical expressiveness of SSW. It varies by instrument how successful this has been, but on the whole I quite like this approach. If I had to do it again I might well have SSW + OTW Exp B, but there's a lot that I love in the Claire also (when taken as a supplement to SSW, and not a general purpose wind lib). 

OT explicitly partitions a general purpose vs lyrical instruments strategy in the way the main lib is augmented with Exp B & C (there's useful examples on the main OTW thread, including helpful demos by re-peat on the limitations of the main library for lyrical parts). Whereas, by comparison with OT, many of the SSW instruments can take you surprisingly far into lyrical territory (ie the Ob the B.Cl, not so much the Cl).

Were I debating SSW vs SStW as a main library, the biggest issue in addition to the hall sound, would be that SStW is apparently not as deeply sampled as (or in any event, seems not to extend into lyrical territory as far as) SSW. I'd be curious how a Claire + SStS strategy would work. The big question is how well it will blend - especially if you only have core version. I find the close mics to be absolutely essential for SSW, wheres merely nice to have on comparable string libraries.

I have a demos of SSW mixed with Claire - but they would be off topic here.


----------



## jaketanner (May 6, 2019)

ism said:


> The big question is how well it will blend - especially if you only have core version. I find the close mics to be absolutely essential for SSW, wheres merely nice to have on comparable string libraries.



Good to know...and that's how I would use 8dio as well. I do have the Studio winds on my wishlist...just reading the reviews versus listening to the walkthroughs (which let's face it, they are not going out of their way to expose any limitations), and trying to figure if it's a wise investment.


----------



## jbuhler (May 6, 2019)

jaketanner said:


> Good to know...and that's how I would use 8dio as well. I do have the Studio winds on my wishlist...just reading the reviews versus listening to the walkthroughs (which let's face it, they are not going out of their way to expose any limitations), and trying to figure if it's a wise investment.


On the other hand, I don't think Paul's walkthrough and demo for Studio Woodwinds do the library much of a favor. I think this video by Paul sells the library much better:


----------



## axb312 (May 6, 2019)

Downloaded and tried SStW core.

My initial thoughts:
1. Tree 1 mics are bad. Core version should be switched to a close mic or one of the mix options if that's possible. It has a muddy kind of room tone which doesn't sound so great.
2. Panning seems to be weird in the tree 1 mics from what I hear, like everything is panned to the right.
3. Clarinet and bassoon are missing the staccatissimo articulation. Maybe other instruments as well - probably glanced over them in my cursory look.
4. Oboe is just plain bad and should be redone. Doesn't have any of the emotion or expressiveness of an oboe.
5. Staccatissimo dynamics follow the mod wheel. This is weird since the staccatos follow velocity. I'm not sure if this behavior can be changed. Multitongues also follow the mod wheel. Also weird.
6. Runs with the legato articulation are OK. Can sound robotic at times.
7. Vibrato blending is not so smooth.
8. Fit somewhat better in an orchestral context than CH winds.
9. No unseemly/ overly odd samples so far.

Do I like it? I don't know yet. Do I feel like I need the pro version?i think I'd rather wait for - infinite woodwinds and cinematic studio woodwinds before deciding.

What is unsettling is Spitfire often takes its own seet time (if at all) to update its libraries. If some of these bother you (and keep bothering me) it's probably a smart idea to stay away from this library than hope Spitfire is going to do something about it.


----------



## Diablo IV (May 6, 2019)

There are several issues when "wanting" a library: 1. Some of us don't know any better (noobs) 2. We can't test the library 3. Even if we could test it, we go back to point number 1. (I tested Hans Zimmer Piano, thought yeah, this is nice, bought it, now regret it...). At the end of the day, I want the best library. I cannot say Spitfire WW or any library from them or any developer is bad or good, but I can say that when you find out after some experience that what you bought is meh, and it cost 399 bucks, then at that moment you stop trusting that company and who cares? Only you, because they already have your money for good.


----------



## ism (May 6, 2019)

jaketanner said:


> Good to know...and that's how I would use 8dio as well. I do have the Studio winds on my wishlist...just reading the reviews versus listening to the walkthroughs (which let's face it, they are not going out of their way to expose any limitations), and trying to figure if it's a wise investment.



Just to add a more impressionistic coda to that - whatever the merits of SStW, I do feel that SSW is one of the truly great sample libraries. I'm sure I'll continue to augment it (with Claire, OT, Fluffy, Sonokinetic etc), and hope for updates to its weak points (ie. lyrical clarinet). But I wouldn't be at all surprised if 10 years from now I'm still using it. No disrespect to competing libraries, but to my ear there's nothing that comes close to that particular SSW sound.

SStW - well lots to love here. Both as an amazingly priced entry point, and as an expansion to the SSW (or other main lib) palette, or for the "glassy" sound if you value the dryness of the studio sound, or for that moment where you just really want a touch of harshness in an oboe solo, or probably a dozen other things besides, and I'm seriously considering picking it up.

But SSW is just such an amazing piece of work - assuming of course that you're partial to whatever it is about the sound that makes it sound so great. No other library - with the major exception of Tundra - has had such an impact on the way I think about sample libraries, and what's possible with sample libraries.

So I stand by all the above technical pontification. But emotional, SSW all the way.


----------



## Apostate (May 6, 2019)

Upgraded to Professional and this is a terrific library!

Thanks to re-peat for providing the samples that ultimately led to buying this, SStW's one of the most inspiring libraries I ever owned...and I own a TON of Spitfire, Hein, and EW.


----------



## dzilizzi (May 6, 2019)

Denkii said:


> On one hand I can see the problem you're describing and I agree to some extent.
> On the other hand: If I hear something and believe it sounds good and I want it, that's enough validation for me.





jamwerks said:


> This is a perfect library for someone getting a start (and not just), something worth having in your pallet. My quibbles with it are specific to my usage and my taste. If you generally like what you hear, then go for it!



This is the problem, I'm not sure I like what I hear. I need to relisten to some of the walkthroughs. And I have SSO plus the basic OT WW. (and VSL SE and HWO Gold) so really, it is not needed other than it is drier than the other libraries. Well, not VSL, but that has only 2 RR's so it is not the best.


----------



## Banquet (May 6, 2019)

Well, I took the plunge and bought the Studio Orchestra core package in the Spring Sale. I've been going through it today and, I have to say, I'm absolutely thrilled with how it sounds! To my ears it sounds better than the walkthroughs and certainly much better than I thought it would after reading some of the negative comments about it. However, I fully admit I am totally unqualified to judge... I wrote music in my youth and somehow fell out of it for 20 years. Last year I started writing again was slightly surprised to find the music that now most inspires me to write are orchestral pieces by composers such as Jeremy Soule and James Horner. 

I've never written an orchestral piece before, but wanted a library that separated all the instruments so I could have a try. I fully understand that there are better libraries available, but to get strings, brass and woodwinds for just over £300 on a small footprint of about 33gb is fantastic for me. If I do become devoted to this type of composition and start seeing the flaws in these libraries I can always upgrade in the years to come and I'm sure I won't begrudge the small outlay that got me started!


----------



## dzilizzi (May 6, 2019)

jbuhler said:


> On the other hand, I don't think Paul's walkthrough and demo for Studio Woodwinds do the library much of a favor. I think this video by Paul sells the library much better:



You know what sucks? @paulthomson even makes the "what not to do" sound good. At least compared to my experiments.  

But thanks for the link. It was actually very useful.


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 6, 2019)

dzilizzi said:


> This is the problem, I'm not sure I like what I hear. I need to relisten to some of the walkthroughs. And I have SSO plus the basic OT WW. (and VSL SE and HWO Gold) so really, it is not needed other than it is drier than the other libraries. Well, not VSL, but that has only 2 RR's so it is not the best.


Shit, you already have great stuff! You're probably good.


----------



## dzilizzi (May 6, 2019)

Parsifal666 said:


> Shit, you already have great stuff! You're probably good.


I probably am. I really like the sound of SSO. But I may pick up the core version of the SStO since I can get it for about $237. Then I would only need to upgrade the winds and brass later. I picked up the strings pro when they had the last sale.


----------



## Denkii (May 6, 2019)

Can we get @Cory Pelizzari to make a review? We could tell him that woodwinds is the new percussion, maybe that would help.


----------



## jaketanner (May 6, 2019)

You guys are killing me...lol. I mean truthfully no library is going please everyone. I think also, it depends on the skill level that you are at. Those with lots of expectations are going to critique it harder. But on the flip side, it’s also a cheap library and not meant to compete with OT, or even SSW for that matter. I think it fills a void for the middle ground of wind libraries. If it weren’t on sale, I’d definitely pass and wait for CSW or even Century Winds down the line...but this is very tempting.


----------



## Cory Pelizzari (May 6, 2019)

Denkii said:


> Can we get @Cory Pelizzari to make a review? We could tell him that woodwinds is the new percussion, maybe that would help.


Did someone say percussion?


----------



## Michael Stibor (May 7, 2019)

I bought the Core version over a month ago, thinking to myself "How bad could it be? Even if there's a couple of rotten apples, who cares? I'm getting a whole barrel for an incredibly low price!" 
Big mistake. I literally can't even use this library for anything other than the occasional staccatos. Sure there's a couple of patches that are great, but I can't really build tracks around a serviceable clarinet flutter, when all other articulations are sub par. My biggest issue is how BIG it tries to be. They might as well have called it "Epic Winds". It lacks all of the subtleties required from a wind section. 

I'm no instrument snob either. If it was even half the instrument that it should have been, I'd be singing it's praises, but right now I've written a track where the bassoon and flute take center stage as solo instruments. 
Even though I bought SSW to act as both accompanying and solo instruments, I'm literally using VSL's Bassoon and Fluffy Audio's FREE flute instead. What a shame.


----------



## lux (May 7, 2019)

for what it worths I just got it and, while the sound may be considered definitely a bit clinical, I like the library and I'm glad it's part of my arsenal now. It has kinda an old fashioned feel to me. I just made a quick and stupid 30secs ww test choir using just the lib and Reflektor reverb.



What I like overall in the studio serie is that they included a somehow surprising amount of useful articulations with a reasonable memory footprint. Not the definitive tool, but useful nonetheless, at least for me.


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 7, 2019)

lux said:


> for what it worths I just got it and, while the sound may be considered definitely a bit clinical, I like the library and I'm glad it's part of my arsenal now. It has kinda an old fashioned feel to me. I just made a quick and stupid 30secs ww test choir using just the lib and Reflektor reverb.
> 
> 
> 
> What I like overall in the studio serie is that they included a somehow surprising amount of useful articulations with a reasonable memory footprint. Not the definitive tool, but useful nonetheless, at least for me.



Oh man sounds nice! I gotsta remember to use Reflektor now.


----------



## Robert_G (May 7, 2019)

Just bought the core version....can't wait to try it out.


----------



## Banquet (May 7, 2019)

lux said:


> for what it worths I just got it and, while the sound may be considered definitely a bit clinical, I like the library and I'm glad it's part of my arsenal now. It has kinda an old fashioned feel to me. I just made a quick and stupid 30secs ww test choir using just the lib and Reflektor reverb.
> 
> 
> 
> What I like overall in the studio serie is that they included a somehow surprising amount of useful articulations with a reasonable memory footprint. Not the definitive tool, but useful nonetheless, at least for me.




Sounds lovely to my ears, Lux, thanks for posting


----------



## jaketanner (May 7, 2019)

Robert_G said:


> Just bought the core version....can't wait to try it out.



You are still in time to add the Pro version to your wishlist if you decide Core isn't sufficient...I've been getting a lot of people that feel the extra mic positions are really needed with this library to get the most out of it.


----------



## axb312 (May 7, 2019)

lux said:


> for what it worths I just got it and, while the sound may be considered definitely a bit clinical, I like the library and I'm glad it's part of my arsenal now. It has kinda an old fashioned feel to me. I just made a quick and stupid 30secs ww test choir using just the lib and Reflektor reverb.
> 
> 
> 
> What I like overall in the studio serie is that they included a somehow surprising amount of useful articulations with a reasonable memory footprint. Not the definitive tool, but useful nonetheless, at least for me.




Why does everything (except the harp) seem like its panned to the right here? Is that the intended effect?


----------



## lux (May 7, 2019)

axb312 said:


> Why does everything (except the harp) seem like its panned to the right here? Is that the intended effect?


I changed the panning myself intentionally, it's not straight out of the library. The flute probably makes it more prominent on the right side, while on left the clarinets and oboe are a bit on the soft side.


----------



## Robert_G (May 8, 2019)

jaketanner said:


> You are still in time to add the Pro version to your wishlist if you decide Core isn't sufficient...I've been getting a lot of people that feel the extra mic positions are really needed with this library to get the most out of it.



So, I put in some time with SStW and I didn't purchase this at launch because there was a lot of negativity about this library. Having now used the library, I'm not sure where this comes from.

1. The amount of content for a 'core' WW library is ridiculous. If it had the Contrabassoon, I'd give it 5/5 for content....none the less for 120 bucks....even full price 200....it's an extremely generous library for what you pay.

2. As for the 1 tree mic....slide the bar to 'close', keep the reverb off and add a front row reverb from spaces II (or some other reverb) and it sounds amazing. Can I still tell that its a tree mic? Sure...but with a tiny bit of work, it still sounded great in a mix. The solo's I would still like to get a bit closer...but I've only had the library since yesterday. In a perfect world with only a one mic offering, yes...the close mic instead of the tree mic would have been perfect...but the tree mic is no where near a deal breaker.

3. It would have been nice to have the KS loaded with the patch instead of manually putting them in, but that's just a nitpick on my part.

4. I don't understand what people are complaining with the sound and programming. The legatos are tight if you need them to be and really sing nicely. The amount of dryness is perfect. The sound is great right out of the box....and can be tinkered with quite easy.

5. The amount of adjustments that Spitfire has included for the Core version goes beyond what I'd expect. There is so much to tinker with to get the sound which is right for you. If one instrument is a bit off your liking...there are so many adjustments to get it really close to what you want. I'm extremely fussy with Clarinets and Spitfire does pretty good with them....especially the Bass Clarinet. Really nice sound.

6. All in all, if you think there is a better and more generous WW library out there for 200 bucks....(120 in my case), you're kidding yourself. I'm very tempted to get the pro. And I'm tempted to buy other Spitfire products too now that I've used their stuff myself. If they are all like SStW, then I would call that fantastic quality.

4.75/5 taking into consideration it's a 'core' library.


----------



## jaketanner (May 8, 2019)

Robert_G said:


> So, I put in some time with SStW and I didn't purchase this at launch because there was a lot of negativity about this library. Having now used the library, I'm not sure where this comes from.
> 
> 1. The amount of content for a 'core' WW library is ridiculous. If it had the Contrabassoon, I'd give it 5/5 for content....none the less for 120 bucks....even full price 200....it's an extremely generous library for what you pay.
> 
> ...



I do not doubt that the library is great and I was considering the court as well. But for not that much more, I would much rather have the pro as I feel it would give me the flexibility I need. But I also want to ask you… Do you have a lot of experience with woodwind Library’s and I am not saying this because I don’t think that you are qualified to answer correctly, I am just asking if you have any benchmarks to compare them against?

If money was not an option, I would probably go T revive. But I agree 100% that they are the best bang for your buck.

Chances are however I am going to get the professional series woodwinds and I thank you for your comments they help a lot.


----------



## Robert_G (May 8, 2019)

jaketanner said:


> I do not doubt that the library is great and I was considering the court as well. But for not that much more, I would much rather have the pro as I feel it would give me the flexibility I need. But I also want to ask you… Do you have a lot of experience with woodwind Library’s and I am not saying this because I don’t think that you are qualified to answer correctly, I am just asking if you have any benchmarks to compare them against?
> 
> If money was not an option, I would probably go T revive. But I agree 100% that they are the best bang for your buck.
> 
> Chances are however I am going to get the professional series woodwinds and I thank you for your comments they help a lot.



I have Composer Cloud plus, so I have both the EW and HW and solo WW libraries with full mics. I also used NI Symphony Woodwinds as well as the Claire English Horn. I haven't used Berlin, but the price of Berlin makes a comparison useless. I can't afford the full Berlin series...as I'm sure many others can't. They do sound beautiful though.

This is my favorite WW library so far.


----------



## axb312 (May 8, 2019)

Robert_G said:


> So, I put in some time with SStW and I didn't purchase this at launch because there was a lot of negativity about this library. Having now used the library, I'm not sure where this comes from.
> 
> 1. The amount of content for a 'core' WW library is ridiculous. If it had the Contrabassoon, I'd give it 5/5 for content....none the less for 120 bucks....even full price 200....it's an extremely generous library for what you pay.
> 
> ...




Hi Robert,

Would love to hear some examples of SStW sounding great in a mix. Here's one short attempt of mine:


Excusing the bad melody and accompaniment, the Flute sounds boxy to my ears.

Regarding Keyswitching, this can be made much simpler (imo) by using UACC.


----------



## Michael Stibor (May 8, 2019)

Robert_G said:


> 6. All in all, if you think there is a better and more generous WW library out there for 200 bucks....you're kidding yourself.




That was my train of thought going in. Unfortunately, it's a case for quantity over quality. I won't repeat what I've already said in this thread, and to all those who are loving it, that's awesome, truly. I wish I could feel the same.

I hadn't upgraded my winds since VSL Special Edition back in 2011 or something like that. And I truly thought that I had done my research and due diligence. Even at this low price, I would gladly give back the money I paid for this if I could.


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 8, 2019)

mikefrommontreal said:


> That was my train of thought going in. Unfortunately, it's a case for quantity over quality. I won't repeat what I've already said in this thread, and to all those who are loving it, that's awesome, truly. I wish I could feel the same.
> 
> I hadn't upgraded my winds since VSL Special Edition back in 2011 or something like that. And I truly thought that I had done my research and due diligence. Even at this low price, I would gladly give back the money I paid for this if I could.


You might consider the Hein, Mike.


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (May 8, 2019)

mikefrommontreal said:


> I would gladly give back the money I paid for this if I could.


But if you give back the money you paid for it, they'd have to sell you back the library they sold you.


----------



## Michael Stibor (May 8, 2019)

Land of Missing Parts said:


> But if you give back the money you paid for it, they'd have to sell you back the library they sold you.



Valid point! You know what I mean.


----------



## jaketanner (May 8, 2019)

Robert_G said:


> I have Composer Cloud plus, so I have both the EW and HW and solo WW libraries with full mics. I also used NI Symphony Woodwinds as well as the Claire English Horn. I haven't used Berlin, but the price of Berlin makes a comparison useless. I can't afford the full Berlin series...as I'm sure many others can't. They do sound beautiful though.
> 
> This is my favorite WW library so far.



Never liked EW winds, they are the worst of the bunch, but I never tried them with the full mics...and I have only NI Essentials winds to compare, and didn't like them at all. I do have the full Claire bundle however, and I like them...but no ensemble patches. Anyway...I think Studio Winds pro it is.


----------



## jaketanner (May 8, 2019)

axb312 said:


> Excusing the bad melody and accompaniment, the Flute sounds boxy to my ears.



what mic position did you use?


----------



## Robert_G (May 8, 2019)

Here's a quick run with a tighter legato with the mics put as far up front as I could (by tinkering) with a fairly tight legato. I really like the way the Bass Clarinet turned out. Light CSS to go with it.

1. Bass Clarinet
[AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/spitfire-bass-clarinet-mp3.19901/][/AUDIOPLUS]

2. Bassoon
[AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/spitfire-bassoon-mp3.19902/][/AUDIOPLUS]

3. Flute
[AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/spitfire-flute-mp3.19903/][/AUDIOPLUS]


----------



## dzilizzi (May 8, 2019)

Robert_G said:


> Here's a quick run with a tighter legato with the mics put as far up front as I could (by tinkering) with a fairly tight legato. I really like the way the Bass Clarinet turned out. Light CSS to go with it.


I think this sounds pretty good. I think it is a matter of learning to program to the libraries' strengths. And remember they need to take breaths. I always forget that part......


----------



## Robert_G (May 8, 2019)

dzilizzi said:


> I think this sounds pretty good. I think it is a matter of learning to program to the libraries' strengths. And remember they need to take breaths. I always forget that part......



I didn't put a tonne of time into this. I've only had the library since yesterday, but I wanted to show that the legato was pretty decent...and that the tree mic wasn't as bad as some might think.


----------



## Michael Stibor (May 8, 2019)

Robert_G said:


> Here's a quick run with a tighter legato with the mics put as far up front as I could (by tinkering) with a fairly tight legato. I really like the way the Bass Clarinet turned out. Light CSS to go with it.
> 
> 1. Bass Clarinet
> [AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/spitfire-bass-clarinet-mp3.19901/][/AUDIOPLUS]
> ...



No disrespect to anything _you _did, but I actually don't think this sounds good at all. It sounds incredibly MIDI-ish and flat, and those tree mics are just wrong.


----------



## Robert_G (May 8, 2019)

mikefrommontreal said:


> No disrespect to anything _you _did, but I actually don't think this sounds good at all. It sounds incredibly MIDI-ish and flat, and those tree mics are just wrong.



I didnt use any modulation or expression. Didnt want to put that much time into a quick demo


----------



## axb312 (May 8, 2019)

jaketanner said:


> what mic position did you use?


Core / T1 mics...


----------



## AllanH (May 8, 2019)

The stereo mixes are also very nice as a proxy for dialing in custom mics


----------



## jaketanner (May 8, 2019)

axb312 said:


> Core / T1 mics...



That would explain the boxiness you hear. With this particular library recording, I believe that the additional mic positions are key.


----------



## prodigalson (May 8, 2019)

Robert_G said:


> I didnt use any modulation or expression. Didnt want to put that much time into a quick demo



I suspect this might be the kind of thing that drives developers crazy. People throwing up "demos" of a library without the slightest attention to factors that directly impact the overall impression of it. I'm sure you just did it to show the "tone" or the tree mic or whatever but a lot of things contribute to the overall impression of the "sound" of a library and the reality is that almost any library will sound bad, synthy and flat (to varying degrees) if you don't even bother to ride dynamics. 

IMHO, if you're going to take the time to record a "quick demo" the least you could do is ride the modwheel even a little while you're doing it.


----------



## Robert_G (May 8, 2019)

prodigalson said:


> I suspect this might be the kind of thing that drives developers crazy. People throwing up "demos" of a library without the slightest attention to factors that directly impact the overall impression of it. I'm sure you just did it to show the "tone" or the tree mic or whatever but a lot of things contribute to the overall impression of the "sound" of a library and the reality is that almost any library will sound bad, synthy and flat (to varying degrees) if you don't even bother to ride dynamics.
> 
> IMHO, if you're going to take the time to record a "quick demo" the least you could do is ride the modwheel even a little while you're doing it.



Just for the record....someone here asked me for a demo. Just because someone asks for a demo doesnt mean im going to spend an entire afternoon on it.


----------



## prodigalson (May 8, 2019)

Robert_G said:


> Just for the record....someone here asked me for a demo. Just because someone asks for a demo doesnt mean im going to spend an entire afternoon on it.



I obviously don't know your process or workflow but, IMO, it would have been a lot fairer to the library and ultimately a lot more informative to whoever asked for the demo to skip the strings and spend the time you took recording them to record a single pass at some mod wheel data


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (May 8, 2019)

prodigalson said:


> People throwing up "demos" of a library without the slightest attention to factors that directly impact the overall impression of it.



This, exactly. Even Hollywood Strings (for example) sounds like shit if you don't program them as intended. I really despise such demos.


----------



## Scott Moran (May 8, 2019)

Can anyone comment on the main differences and/or strengths/weaknesses between Spitfire Studio Woodwinds and Symphonic Woodwinds.


----------



## Robert_G (May 8, 2019)

Well....that will be the last 'quick' demo i do here.


----------



## brenneisen (May 8, 2019)

nothing personal, boy


----------



## Denkii (May 9, 2019)

prodigalson said:


> I suspect this might be the kind of thing that drives developers crazy. People throwing up "demos" of a library without the slightest attention to factors that directly impact the overall impression of it. I'm sure you just did it to show the "tone" or the tree mic or whatever but a lot of things contribute to the overall impression of the "sound" of a library and the reality is that almost any library will sound bad, synthy and flat (to varying degrees) if you don't even bother to ride dynamics.
> 
> IMHO, if you're going to take the time to record a "quick demo" the least you could do is ride the modwheel even a little while you're doing it.


I would argue the exact opposite way and say it is even more valid since it shows what users could expect right out of the box. Why would a user only be allowed to 'demonstrate' something, if it works well right out of the box but not if it needs work?

Alternatives to these raw and quite honest demos are not a responsibility of the user but of anyone who wants to market the product. It's not an ad after all and it is exactly that: demonstrating what to expect. The truth is neither this nor a very sophisticated demo that sounds incredible since the latter is something that not everyone can achieve to the same standards. But everyone is starting from the same point and that's what has been demonstrated.

People who are no Photoshop pros might get worse results in Photoshop than if they had used a way less professional software that offered a preset/filter for whatever they wanted to do. Doesn't mean Photoshop is bad, just shows their skill and/or amount of work they'd had to put into it. That's one of the factors to consider.

That's my personal opinion and I'm grateful for the demo.


----------



## jaketanner (May 9, 2019)

Denkii said:


> I would argue the exact opposite way and say it is even more valid since it shows what users could expect right out of the box. Why would a user only be allowed to 'demonstrate' something, if it works well right out of the box but not if it needs work?



Well, I personally would never want to hear a demo of a library that is not used how it's intended...because I would not use it that way. I do feel the good intentions from the poster of the demo, but it's not really a demo, quick or otherwise, of what the library actually sounds like. Unfortunately there is no one library that I know or have heard of, that does not require at least the use of dynamics...reason being that the samples are supposed to imitate a live player, and not supposed to be stagnant, especially winds. There isn't a professional live player that would play a violin without vibrato and some form of dynamics to show how nice it sounds...and the same needs to be done with samples, whether woodwinds, brass or strings. NOW...the only people that demos like that normally sway, are those that do not know the potential. So for a novice listener, it's potentially harmful as they might not like what they hear, but for those who know should not take that as "this is how it sounds", because it's not fair to the developer...as it's not played as intended. I think that's the point here.

Paul Thompson goes over this very exact thing in this video.


----------



## ism (May 9, 2019)

Something that varies between libraries, is what I call ‘plonkability’. Some libraries are designed to let you sit down and plonk in some notes like you’re at a piano. (Including some really superb libraries like the Joshua Bell - so its not an insult, just a design choice).

At the other extreme is something like spitfire solo strings. Incredible musicality, terrible plonkability.

But this is also by design. because once your get the hang of crafting the arcs, you get a performability instead - the ability to really craft a performance, that even the (otherwise magnificent) Joshua bell violin can’t match. 

Which is to say the the musicality of the instrument, is by design, in what you get by crafting the performance. Christian talks about not using the wheel as being like ‘conducting a corpse’, and I think this reflects a design philosophy that runs though most of their instruments. Personally, I’ll take a performability over the instant gratification of plonkability any day. Though I do plenty of plonking myself. And I can see how developers who invest greatly in crafting the underlying performability and musicality of an instrument are driven crazy by the kind of instant gratifying unboxing videos that drive so much marketing theses days. 

So a pure tone demo sans mod wheel is perfectly valuable as that. And it may tells us that the library had poor plonkability. But it’s also helpful to contextualize it as not necessarily telling us much about the real musicality if the instrument.


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 9, 2019)

Huge fan of the solo Alto Flute, Clarinet, and _*all *_the low woodwinds. The ensemble patches for both Flute and Oboe remain the weak point of the library to my ears (but, to be perfectly blunt, Albion One for instance has a_ ton_ more defects and that's a far more popular library). 

That said, I'm having a ball with SStWW. I finished up my Music for Solo Woodwinds and Celest and am now dicking around with a new piece for Solo Woodwinds and Brass (and yes, both are down to my usual terrible level of composition). 

I've been so inspired by the library I've been getting only a few hours sleep a night since I bought it.


----------



## jaketanner (May 9, 2019)

Parsifal666 said:


> Huge fan of the solo Alto Flute, Clarinet, and _*all *_the low woodwinds. The ensemble patches for both Flute and Oboe remain the weak point of the library to my ears (but, to be perfectly blunt, Albion One for instance has a_ ton_ more defects and that's a far more popular library).
> 
> That said, I'm having a ball with SStWW. I finished up my Music for Solo Woodwinds and Celest and am now dicking around with a new piece for Solo Woodwinds and Brass (and yes, both are down to my usual terrible level of composition).
> 
> I've been so inspired by the library I've been getting only a few hours sleep a night since I bought it.



Did you get the Professional version? Also, what reverb are you using? 

Lastly...with regards to the oboe...it's a shame that most feel it's not on par with the others, but I think that it's a matter of the oboe requiring a really good space for it to shine. Perhaps the hall SF used, was not perfect for the oboe but was passable, in order to get all three of the studio libraries to all work together. A "dry" room does not work well for all instruments unfortunately, but it's a question of the greater good...so a quality reverb is needed, as well as the use of the additional mics, to get the most out of it. The single tree mic is limiting.


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 9, 2019)

jaketanner said:


> Did you get the Professional version? Also, what reverb are you using?
> 
> Lastly...with regards to the oboe...it's a shame that most feel it's not on par with the others, but I think that it's a matter of the oboe requiring a really good space for it to shine. Perhaps the hall SF used, was not perfect for the oboe but was passable, in order to get all three of the studio libraries to all work together. A "dry" room does not work well for all instruments unfortunately, but it's a question of the greater good...so a quality reverb is needed, as well as the use of the additional mics, to get the most out of it. The single tree mic is limiting.



The tree mic is the least essential, easily, in this library imo. I just use the two close and for now popped RC 48 for reverb. Sounds fine...though for a final mockup I'll probably have to defer to either Altiverb or Spaces II.

You want the Pro version. In fact, at least at this point I'd say either go big or stay home.


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 9, 2019)

I think the Core version with the sole Decca mic is overall not such a good deal, especially with the WL sale on. The Pro is right on, and imo more than worth it.


----------



## jaketanner (May 9, 2019)

Parsifal666 said:


> I think the Core version with the sole Decca mic is overall not such a good deal, especially with the WL sale on. The Pro is right on, and imo more than worth it.



Absolutely, and that's my point. With this dry sound and room, the single mic is not going to cut it really. I have a couple of day still...hoping that something new is going to pop up..LOL Waiting for Performance Samples to either release the Con Moto viola or put on sale the Cello...which they said was due for a sale.. they have 3 days!!! LOL But this is for another thread.


----------



## jaketanner (May 9, 2019)

Parsifal666 said:


> The tree mic is the least essential, easily, in this library imo. I just use the two close and for now popped RC 48 for reverb.



The close mics with reverb are actually not that great of an idea...according to SF, you need to include the use of at least one of the Decca mics or outriggers with a close to get it to sound right...as well as a decent reverb. I think the "core" version of library might actually be mis-marketed. It appears to be for "beginners", but the truth is, to really work this library, you need to have some experience in mixing as well as programming. Also, if you are a novice, I think the Professional version is the way to go...trying to make the core version sound good for someone who doesn't have the experience will be frustrating. Again, a bit of misleading marketing..BUT NOT intentional on SF's side...so not blaming them, just seems to be the experience of it's users. The term "professional", should be changed to "complete"...Core version and complete is better...personal opinion of course.


----------



## ism (May 9, 2019)

Parsifal666 said:


> That said, I'm having a ball with SStWW. I finished up my Music for Solo Woodwinds and Celest



And chance we could hear it?


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 9, 2019)

ism said:


> And chance we could hear it?



My music sucks embarrassingly bad. I'm honestly really sorry.


----------



## ism (May 9, 2019)

Parsifal666 said:


> My music sucks embarrassingly bad. I'm honestly really sorry.



How about if I offer to share my latest composition in return? I call it "Noodle upon an Arpegio in C". It can only make you look good by comparison.


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 9, 2019)

ism said:


> How about if I offer to share my latest composition in return? I call it "Noodle upon an Arpegio in C". It can only make you look good by comparison.



That's a really kind offer, but I was being serious. It would be a cringe-fest, mostly for me.

The reality is, I hesitate to pretend my word is especially valid when I have such a low opinion of my compositional...uh, skills. All I can comfortably do is share my experience until someone better than me shares something more concrete (meaning precisely audio). Until then, everyone has more than the perfect right to shut me out.


----------



## ism (May 9, 2019)

In all seriousness, and fully respecting your reticence, in practice I often find compositions by mere mortals more helpful and inspiring that Beethoven (or Andy Blaney). 

There's a very good Irish novelist who read Joyce as young man and thought "Well I could never write anything that good". It was only years later that, while working as a journalist (in Canada), he read a novel published by a colleague and though "Well I could certainly write something that good". 

One of the things that's a drag about some of the negativity on these threads (and the fact that it's coming not from beginners but from the ultra high end of the spectrum of experience) is that compared to other threads, I think it's a good bet that it's deterring people on the mere mortal parts the spectrum from sharing anything.


Maybe what we need is another thread for "Noodles, sketches, experiments (successful or otherwise), fragments, intriguing bits of string, and other adventures in SStO". 


Anyway, just an abstract thought. Completely respect your reticence (I'm much the same, which is part of why I tend to share my noodles and not my 'compositions', if I dare even call them that. Though I seriously doubt your work is as remotely bad as you say. Except when compared to Beethoven. But then, that's like being 'dumber that Einstein" isn't it?)


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 9, 2019)

ism said:


> In all seriousness, and fully respecting your reticence, in practice I often find compositions by mere mortals more helpful and inspiring that Beethoven (or Andy Blaney).
> 
> There's a very good Irish novelist who read Joyce as young man and thought "Well I could never write anything that good". It was only years later that, while working as a journalist (in Canada), he read a novel published by a colleague and though "Well I could certainly write something that good".
> 
> ...



I'd say this is an insightful post. +1


----------



## ism (May 9, 2019)

Parsifal666 said:


> I'd say this is an insightful post. +1



Though, in fairness, this was the 60s, and Canadians didn't even start writing novels until, like, 1954.

I think I will start that thread.


----------



## Michael Stibor (May 9, 2019)

ism said:


> Though, in fairness, this was the 60s, and Canadians didn't even start writing novels until, like, 1954.
> 
> I think I will start that thread.


Uhh... Anne of Green Gables!


----------



## ism (May 9, 2019)

mikefrommontreal said:


> Uhh... Anne of Green Gables!



Except that I prefer to start counting with Mordecai Richler and Margret Lawrence. Its just a personal preference mind you.

(So many likes for such an obscure Can-Lit joke, who knew?)


----------



## NeonMediaKJT (May 9, 2019)

Hmmm... Just reading the comments and I'm stuck. I have Cinewinds Core, but lack English Horn and Bass Clarinet. I have been trying to decide whether to get Spitfire Studio Woodwinds whilst on sale for £109 or VSL Woodwinds SE for 70 Euros. I tried VSL SE and while I like it, it doesn't have much dynamic range and I'm not keen on having to use another license dongle. Spitfire Studio Winds sound nice sound wise, but I find the legato a little subtle? And then Caspian Oceania choir went on sale and now my mind is in a mexican standoff, lol.

Which would be your choice, guys?


----------



## re-peat (May 9, 2019)

Neon, 
here's a little example of *http://users.telenet.be/re-peat/SStWW_Bcl-EngHrn.mp3 (the Bass Clarinet and the English Horn)*, in case you like to hear a bit more than what you already heard.

_


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 9, 2019)

re-peat said:


> Neon,
> here's a little example of *http://users.telenet.be/re-peat/SStWW_Bcl-EngHrn.mp3 (the Bass Clarinet and the English Horn)*, in case you like to hear a bit more than what you already heard.
> 
> _



This sounds way muddier than the sounds I'm getting. The Bass Clarinet is one of the prizes in that library imo, in fact I prefer it to any of my others for solo work. My BC sounds way crisper and more rugged (in the good way).


----------



## jaketanner (May 9, 2019)

Parsifal666 said:


> This sounds way muddier than the sounds I'm getting. The Bass Clarinet is one of the prizes in that library imo, in fact I prefer it to any of my others for solo work. My BC sounds way crisper and more rugged (in the good way).



Maybe re-peat has the core?


----------



## re-peat (May 9, 2019)

Parsifal666 said:


> This sounds way muddier than the sounds I'm getting.



Then either you must be doing something to the sound, Pars, or maybe you play the instrument with the modwheel constantly at fairly high or high values, which would sound like *http://users.telenet.be/re-peat/SStWW_Bcl_HighMod.mp3 (this)*. (Not the instrument's most flattering state, I find.)
All my audio examples come direct out of Kontakt and then straight to the Master Output with no processing whatsoever in between. (Unless someone specifically asks to add reverb or something.)

Completely disagree with your prizes-comment too, I'm afraid. I don't hear anything of what I love about a bass clarinet in this sampled version.

_


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 9, 2019)

re-peat said:


> Then either you must be doing something to the sound, Pars, or maybe you play the instrument with the modwheel constantly at fairly high or high values, which would sound like *http://users.telenet.be/re-peat/SStWW_Bcl_HighMod.mp3 (this)*. (Not the instrument's most flattering state, I find.)
> All my audio examples come direct out of Kontakt and then straight to the Master Output with no processing whatsoever in between. (Unless someone specifically asks to add reverb or something.)
> 
> Completely disagree with your prizes-comment too, I'm afraid. I don't hear anything of what I love about a bass clarinet in this sampled version.
> ...


 But you've said more than once you don't like ANY woodwind sample libraries. Soo, all respect but how much regard should we have for your input here? You don't like anything... What's the difference?


----------



## jaketanner (May 9, 2019)

Parsifal666 said:


> You don't like anything... What's the difference?





Parsifal666 said:


> But you've said more than once you don't like ANY woodwind sample libraries. Soo, all respect but how much regard should we have for your input here? You don't like anything... What's the difference?



I was just about to ask him for a benchmark sample. But true, if you are comparing samples straight against live musicians, then no wonder. But sample against sample, I think I can definitely make SF work.


----------



## re-peat (May 9, 2019)

Parsifal666 said:


> how much regard should we have for your input here


That’s not for me to say, is it? I simply give my opinion, whether someone finds it useful or helpful, or not, is entirely up to him/her. Take from it what you want. Or not. I don't care.

Look, all I’m doing here is give a Neon some added material which might help him/her to arrive at a decision on how to proceed. What he/she does it with it, again, entirely his/her choice. 

Something wrong with that? And why you’re yapping anyway? You yourself have thanked me more than once in the past few days for my input, so … what’s your problem all of a sudden?

I also don’t see why my dislike for most of what’s out there virtual-woodwind-wise should disqualify me from having an opinion on this mock bass clarinet. I can’t help it that it confirms my dislike, can I? Wish it didn’t, but it does.

By the way, if your memory wasn’t so pedantically selective as it seems to be, I think you’ll find I also said: “Here and there, there are a few isolated patches that I can work with, and sometimes, one of the smaller libraries may contain a nice surprise or two”.

Jeezes, Pars. You're a sad character sometimes.
_


----------



## Denkii (May 9, 2019)

The irony


----------



## ism (May 9, 2019)

Ok, so adding to the litany, attacks on: memory, pedantry and "sadness" (what ever that means) to the insults directed at music taste, mental age ... then there's a few I can't remember of the top of my head ... and some more were kind of oblique ... then there was something about bunnies ... and of course reading level.

Time for a "musicians berating musicians" sub form?

But the seriously answer is that context matters. For instance, things like price matters - not to yourself, as you note, but to most of us. Understanding that you effectively claim you would critique the library as savagely - and correct if I'm wrong - if it were a $30000 bespoke library, than for what it actually is, is quite a helpful piece of context in parsing your contributions through our own contexts.

And in all of this we all have our own contexts in which we work, and in which our opinions form and through which we attempt to understand all the other opinions flying around here, and the contexts in which they form.

So no one is unappreciative of the value of your opinions, and no one is accusing you of maliciously providing bad examples (though no one is accusing you of putting an excessive amount of love and attention into your examples either). And I don't even see anyone being unappreciative for the light you have shone, quite legitimately, on the flaws of these libraries.

But the broader context here is that other people are having a range of very, very different, and often much better experiences. It doesn't make you wrong, because of course these experience are formed in different contexts.

And I completely respect that you bring a superior level of skill and experience to this discussion. But it doesn't make these other opinions invalid. In much the same way that sometimes a composition written by a mere mortal can - in practice, and in a certain context - be more valuable to study that something by Beethoven.

And you don't need to be interested in understanding the contexts of anyone else here. Or in understanding how these contexts are different from your own. And if the opinions of those of us with positive experience with these libraries don't make any sense to you in your own context, that's totally cool. And clearly don't need the insights of most of us here.

But if you're not interesting in understanding where other people or coming from in how they form their own, different, opinions - which understandably might not make much sense within your own context - then hey, how about easing up on the steady stream of insults, aspersions, disparagement and personal attacks on people who simply hold different opinions and are trying to navigate you contributions?

Because its actually really nice that people are taking all this berating in largely good humour (though a couple of delicate egos is all it would take to make this a really toxic #$%# show). But this luck isn't going to last forever.

Just a thought.


----------



## Casey Edwards (May 9, 2019)

I don't post often anymore, but thought I'd share a short piece I wrote with SF orchestral winds (not the studio winds) and a few thoughts.

Here's the piece I wrote after purchasing the SF WWs a few years back. It's only the original BML orchestral WWs with a little support from their Orchestral Piano: https://www.dropbox.com/s/k41eb75s20jr5e8/Darkened Whimsy.mp3?dl=0

I love the sound of the winds and the hall. Every library has its shortcomings, and this one is no exception, but it's still quite good. I have the SF Percussion, Piano, Harp and WWs and they're all lovely and wrapped in that great Air ambience. Here's a concern I voiced before purchasing. However, as soon as they abandoned their vision of completing the BML series I jumped ship. I invested in a product that remains incomplete and has since been repackaged into a form that doesn't even contain the original mic position layout for reasons I don't even want to speculate about. Good news is there are other options to fill the gaps or replace completely. Good luck.


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (May 9, 2019)

Ain't got time for this Honky-Tonk.


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 9, 2019)

re-peat said:


> That’s not for me to say, is it? I simply give my opinion, whether someone finds it useful or helpful, or not, is entirely up to him/her. Take from it what you want. Or not. I don't care.
> 
> Look, all I’m doing here is give a Neon some added material which might help him/her to arrive at a decision on how to proceed. What he/she does it with it, again, entirely his/her choice.
> 
> ...


 Right. I'm sad.


----------



## NeonMediaKJT (May 9, 2019)

re-peat said:


> That’s not for me to say, is it? I simply give my opinion, whether someone finds it useful or helpful, or not, is entirely up to him/her. Take from it what you want. Or not. I don't care.
> 
> Look, all I’m doing here is give a Neon some added material which might help him/her to arrive at a decision on how to proceed. What he/she does it with it, again, entirely his/her choice.
> 
> ...



Hey, I appreciate the samples. Thanks for that!


----------



## NYC Composer (May 9, 2019)

Where are the user examples that contradict Piet’s opinion and make the stuff sound really good? Did I miss ‘em?

Those who disagree should probably put up.


----------



## ism (May 9, 2019)

Well, again, context matters, and why would anyone risk exposing their music in this environment? When any one who professes to like the library is berated as a "mental 5 year old" or "sedated rabbit". Where they have to defend their "artistic taste" merely for liking the library and are challenged to "put up" to prove it.



We saw this on the SStS thread also. And this is really the root of what bothers me because I want to hear used demos also.

There are great threads where there's a collaborative spirit and a diversity of opinions. And then there's this thread. Where diversity of option and experience is fundamentally not being respected. In fact it's being actively derided.

And you realize that there's an implicit accusation in your post that anyone who reports having a good experience is lying or incompetent right?

Totally fine to hate a library as much as you like. But this isn't cool.


----------



## NYC Composer (May 9, 2019)

ism said:


> Well, again, context matters, and why would anyone risk exposing their music in this environment? When any one who professes to like the library is berated as a "mental 5 year old" or "sedated rabbit". Where they have to defend their "artistic taste" merely for liking the library and are challenged to "put up" to prove it.
> 
> We saw this on the SStS thread also. And this is really the root of what bothers me because I want to hear used demos also.
> 
> ...



People put up examples all the time. They take risks. 

You can’t affect anyone who has a decent amount of self regard by “berating” them....and the proof is usually in the pudding. Besides, people are free to agree, disagree, take whatever point of view they want. 

I post pieces on The Sound Board once in a while. Recently, I posted one that Piet was pretty negative about (and we’re friendly.) I went back and re-mixed it and it definitely improved.

I have three Spitfire libraries. I’d be surprised if Piet has less than a dozen. 
We are of like minds in that we feel Spitfire has some QC issues. Releasing libraries as they do at such an astonishing rate, this is probably not that hard to understand. Maybe they could cut back and improve QC a little? That would be a Good Thing.

Your problem seems to be about vehemence and tone. Maybe you could concentrate a little more on content? Spitfire has done some wonderful work. It could be improved, as it feels a little slipshod these days. Wouldn’t we all like to see that?

Just my opinion....and my last for this thread. Cheers.


----------



## ism (May 9, 2019)

NYC Composer said:


> People put up examples all the time.



Intentionally or otherwise, you've used the phrase "put up" with an implicit "or shut up" following it in your first post, but then you've shifted the context so that it means something quite different when it reappears.





NYC Composer said:


> You can’t affect anyone who has a decent amount of self regard by “berating” them....and the proof is usually in the pudding. Besides, people are free to agree, disagree, take whatever point of view they want.



Absolutely. Mostly the response has been remarkably good humoured, even in the face of personal attacks and insults. I mean they're just sample libraries. Unlike other threads, I don't see any evidence that anyone on the receiving end of this invective is too bothered at a personal level.

Yet at the same time, a stream of insults, even if they don't immediately blow up, have a way of seeping into a discourse and quietly poisoning the ground water. And for all that people have been (mostly) good natured, the water quality here is clearly suffering.

More simply put, if you could choose to operate in an environment where it's ok to like a library without being berated for your "5 year old mental age" vs an environment it's not ok to like a library without being berated for your "5 year old mental age" which would you choose?

And on a site with the epigraph "musicians helping musicians", it's a bit odd that we forced to this choice in the first place.

(And if you aggregate all the insults and aspersions across recent threads, I think you'll find there's no reason to put "berated" in quotes. )




NYC Composer said:


> We are of like minds in that we feel Spitfire has some QC issues



Again, totally fair. And I completely understand this point partly because I have some sympathy for it myself, and partly because it has been so often litigated and re litigated that its kind of hard to miss. And I wish the oboe was more lyrical too.

But this also misses the point. Because yes, the library has issues. Yes, these are dealbreakers for some people. Yes, they make tiny minority of people (who for some reason bought the library anyway) vehemently hate the library. Totally fine.

But others experience the same issues, yet don't find it a deal breaker. Why isn't this ok too? Surely contexts that lead people to, on balance, like the library can be respected as much as the contexts that lead people to, on balance, hate the library?

And in the case of SStS, it was all I could do to even figure out how to reproduce some of the issues that were noted. Not that I'm not grateful to have these issues pointed out. Just that, you know I'm not sure I would have every found them on my own. So not dealbreakers.





NYC Composer said:


> Your problem seems to be about vehemence and tone. Maybe you could concentrate a little more on content?



I can cope with vehemence, so that's not the issue.

And I really like this suggestion of concentrating on content.

But the tone matters. You can't separate content from tone. It's really not the steam of insults in itself that bothers me so much as the damage it does to discourse. The lost content that might otherwise have appeared in a more civil context.

Now, personally I don't like SStO as much as the SSO (I'm just really partial to AIR Lyndhurst). But I am finding very beautiful things that SStS can do that I'm pretty sure SCS (which I can't afford) simply can't. And I don't think there's any pretence that SStW is as deeply sampled as SSW or BWW. But it costs $120 and does have its own quality of sound that intrigues me as a possible supplement to SSW (even if the oboe - as has been helpful pointed out - is better in SSW.)

My point is even accepting all the critique, filtered through the context of the vehemence of their expression, its perfect clear that there's beautiful things being written with these libraries, and that they can be very good value besides. So that theres no reason to litigate that feeling this way constitutes being a mental 5 year old. That's just silly. 

So yes, by all means *please* lets focus on the content of what these actually existing libraries, taken for what they are, can do.


Best wished to all. I think I might be done with this thread also.


----------



## Tekkera (May 9, 2019)

re-peat said:


> Jeezes, Pars. You're a sad character sometimes.
> _


He says, after having made posts insulting people.

Tune in next time on the new hit show, "Dick things re-peat says"


----------



## axb312 (May 9, 2019)

Don't get what all the fuss is about. 

Critiquing Spitfire may get them to improve their product. Saying it sounds fine may have them doing nothing. I think it benefits us all to find and point out the flaws to Spitfire.

Yes, this library is not so expensive. This shouldn't give Spitfire an excuse to skimp on quality.

I feel like this library could be massively improved. Isn't going to happen if we let Spitfire feel complacent about it.

So, lets help each other out?


----------



## re-peat (May 10, 2019)

NeonMediaKJT said:


> Hey, I appreciate the samples. Thanks for that!



You're welcome, Neon. If there's anything else you'd like to hear, just let me know.

_


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 10, 2019)

@re-peat I'm honestly sorry I rubbed you the wrong way, and I believe you had some grounds to fire back (though you were relatively restrained and I'm grateful for that...at least I'm not the SA whipping boy whew!)

I remain respectful of your opinion. I guess I was just tired yesterday (busting my butt writing with this library) and waaay too sensitive.

But no excuses, hope you'll forgive me on this and we can shoulder on.​


----------



## re-peat (May 10, 2019)

Absolutely, Pars. No problem. And shoulder on amiably we will.

_


----------



## ism (May 10, 2019)

axb312 said:


> Don't get what all the fuss is about.




You're right of course. And I apologize to everyone (including re-peat) for stirring drama. 

There's got to be a more constructive way to make that point. I just don't know what it is, and would genuinely welcome advice on how to make the point in a more constructively manor.

So working on that.


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (May 10, 2019)

I used to respect re-peat's opinion. So I decided to hear him out...and now I don't anymore. C'est la vie.


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 10, 2019)

Land of Missing Parts said:


> I used to respect re-peat's opinion. So I decided to hear him out...and now I don't anymore. C'est la vie.



I respect re-peat's opinions in general, we just can't seem to see eye to eye on this library. He is definitely capable of being really helpful. 

I'm not actively trying to be charitable, but I wouldn't count him out; I've certainly made good calls on buying libraries at least partly attributable to his input. 

That said, I must admit (I say this light heartedly) this was the first time I bought a library partly due to him providing audio contrary to that lol!

Just joking, re-peat.


----------



## Denkii (May 11, 2019)

Cory Pelizzari said:


> Did someone say percussion?


HOLY SHIT HE DID IT! 


This made my day sir.


----------



## dogdad (May 11, 2019)

Denkii said:


> HOLY SHIT HE DID IT!
> 
> 
> This made my day sir.




Thanks for making this Cory! Your walkthroughs are some of my favorites! And thanks for the patches!


----------



## axb312 (May 13, 2019)

Could anyone with SStW and CSS let me know how you get these libraries to work together?


----------



## jaketanner (May 13, 2019)

axb312 said:


> Could anyone with SStW and CSS let me know how you get these libraries to work together?



The vln1 along with the piccolo are beautiful together. And the Alto flute as well as the a3 flutes sound warm against the vln1 in the lower register. I haven't tried this until you mentioned it, but really nice  I do have the pro version of the winds, however, I just used the default mic which is the same as the core. I'm sure the other mics would add a different level of control and tone if needed...something I need to mess with now. LOL

EDIT: I prefer CSS with the Winds over SF Chamber...it sounds much warmer...but it all depends of course on what you are going for.


----------



## axb312 (May 13, 2019)

jaketanner said:


> The vln1 along with the piccolo are beautiful together. And the Alto flute as well as the a3 flutes sound warm against the vln1 in the lower register. I haven't tried this until you mentioned it, but really nice  I do have the pro version of the winds, however, I just used the default mic which is the same as the core. I'm sure the other mics would add a different level of control and tone if needed...something I need to mess with now. LOL
> 
> EDIT: I prefer CSS with the Winds over SF Chamber...it sounds much warmer...but it all depends of course on what you are going for.



I was hoping someone would have a good mic combination and/ or could help me with levels, send levels etc. 

Personally dislike the tred1 sound and the small space it creates.


----------



## jaketanner (May 13, 2019)

axb312 said:


> I was hoping someone would have a good mic combination and/ or could help me with levels, send levels etc.
> 
> Personally dislike the tred1 sound and the small space it creates.



You asked if they worked well together. I used them in unison though, to double the strings and sounds great. If you are looking for counter melody against the strings, I’m sure they’d also work well, however with one mic position, you are limited. You might want to try bringing the ambient slider to almost dry/close then use a good convolution to add some nice space to match that of CSS.


----------



## axb312 (May 13, 2019)

jaketanner said:


> You asked if they worked well together. I used them in unison though, to double the strings and sounds great. If you are looking for counter melody against the strings, I’m sure they’d also work well, however with one mic position, you are limited. You might want to try bringing the ambient slider to almost dry/close then use a good convolution to add some nice space to match that of CSS.



Hi Jake,

Even with the reverb all the way down I hear that boxy, small room sound. Don't love it. I'd love to hear some examples if you'd like to post them.


----------



## dzilizzi (May 13, 2019)

axb312 said:


> I was hoping someone would have a good mic combination and/ or could help me with levels, send levels etc.
> 
> Personally dislike the tred1 sound and the small space it creates.


I swear I saw a video of Christian Henson showing how he makes them sound like they are in a bigger room. He puts on a delay and a reverb to give the impression of the first bounce back and the actual space sound. Can't find it though.


----------



## jaketanner (May 13, 2019)

axb312 said:


> Hi Jake,
> 
> Even with the reverb all the way down I hear that boxy, small room sound. Don't love it. I'd love to hear some examples if you'd like to post them.



I just got them and haven’t had a chance to fully write anything. I just did a quick test for you to see if they blend. But I would strongly consider getting the pro version. But I’ve me a day or so and I’ll see if I can do something for you. You want unison lines? Let me know what you are looking for.


----------



## bryanmckay (May 13, 2019)

dzilizzi said:


> I swear I saw a video of Christian Henson showing how he makes them sound like they are in a bigger room. He puts on a delay and a reverb to give the impression of the first bounce back and the actual space sound. Can't find it though.





I'm not sure this is the video you mentioned, but I watched it this weekend and went back to play with SStW and SStB with _much_ larger-sounding reverbs (I'm using VSS3) and it sounded pretty nice. Also, if you have the Pro version, I'd recommend checking out the stereo mixes, too. You get two different sounds in those patches, and since I've just been noodling around with these libraries, they're very helpful for exploring the sonority and playability without getting bogged down mixing multiple mics.


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 13, 2019)

I've just been using RC 48... I can already tell Valhalla is in that library's future though


----------



## axb312 (May 13, 2019)

jaketanner said:


> I just got them and haven’t had a chance to fully write anything. I just did a quick test for you to see if they blend. But I would strongly consider getting the pro version. But I’ve me a day or so and I’ll see if I can do something for you. You want unison lines? Let me know what you are looking for.


Unison or whatever sounds nice...


----------



## jaketanner (May 13, 2019)

axb312 said:


> Unison or whatever sounds nice...



Do you have either library? If you do, which version of the winds do you have, so I don't use something you don't have.


----------



## axb312 (May 13, 2019)

jaketanner said:


> Do you have either library? If you do, which version of the winds do you have, so I don't use something you don't have.


I have CSS, CSSS and SStW core.


----------



## jaketanner (May 13, 2019)

axb312 said:


> I have CSS, CSSS and SStW core.



Ok, so I’ll use the tree 1 mic. Since I have the pro, I won’t use the other Mics.


----------



## jaketanner (May 14, 2019)

jaketanner said:


> Ok, so I’ll use the tree 1 mic. Since I have the pro, I won’t use the other Mics.



Messaged you with a sample.


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 14, 2019)

jaketanner said:


> Do you have either library? If you do, which version of the winds do you have, so I don't use something you don't have.



OMG! You live in the same town as my favorite fighter, the Easton Assassin!

A completely off the wall bit of off-topicism!


----------



## jaketanner (May 14, 2019)

Parsifal666 said:


> OMG! You live in the same town as my favorite fighter, the Easton Assassin!
> 
> A completely off the wall bit of off-topicism!



This sounds familiar...I think we did this some time last year.. ha...unless it was someone else?


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 14, 2019)

jaketanner said:


> This sounds familiar...I think we did this some time last year.. ha...unless it was someone else?


(embarrassed)


----------



## jaketanner (May 14, 2019)

Parsifal666 said:


> (embarrassed)



nah don't be..  Been a while anyway.


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 14, 2019)

L


jaketanner said:


> nah don't be..  Been a while anyway.


Old age and Larry Holmes sycophancy. Sorry to be so flagrantly OT.


----------



## axb312 (May 14, 2019)

jaketanner said:


> Messaged you with a sample.


Thanks!


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (May 14, 2019)

Here's a bit of SStW Core in action. I figured I'd try it on the opening of Nocturnes.
[AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/debussy-nocturnes-v01-mp3.20026/][/AUDIOPLUS]

Also BWW Legacy for English Horn and CSS/CSB filling in the strings and brass.

EDIT: Here is my completed version of Nocturnes, mvt. 1


Along with more thoughts about how Spitfire Studio Winds fared with it in this post. Long story short, overall it did well. (Quibbles are that it is a bit thin and, at times, I wish it was more expressive.)


----------



## jaketanner (May 15, 2019)

Here is a very short test I did for another member to see how SStW blends with CSS. Tried to balance it so things were heard clearly, but it's more for the color combination.

Piccolo, Flutes a3, Alto Flute, Bass Clarinet and Contrabassoon
All string sections separated CB is doing pizz.

[AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/ww-css-test_3-mp3.20028/][/AUDIOPLUS]


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 15, 2019)

jaketanner said:


> Here is a very short test I did for another member to see how SStW blends with CSS. Tried to balance it so things were heard clearly, but it's more for the color combination.
> 
> Piccolo, Flutes a3, Alto Flute, Bass Clarinet and Contrabassoon
> All string sections separated CB is doing pizz.
> ...



Heyyy, nice job mixing the libs! Only flaw I detect (which quite likely is just personal taste) is perhaps a wee bit heavy on the reverb....oh wait, I think you mentioned using the Decca mic alone. 

I'm totally cuckoo about SStWW, so the examples always interest me. Thanks, Jake.


----------



## jaketanner (May 15, 2019)

Parsifal666 said:


> Heyyy, nice job mixing the libs! Only flaw I detect (which quite likely is just personal taste) is perhaps a wee bit heavy on the reverb....oh wait, I think you mentioned using the Decca mic alone.
> 
> I'm totally cuckoo about SStWW, so the examples always interest me. Thanks, Jake.



Actually, I may have used a bit too much verb. originally I had a different mic setup...I since changed it to post, but left the reverb the same. I made a custom mic set up, since I have the pro, and used mostly ambient and outriggers...I also then redid the mic setup in CSS to match closer that of the winds...so you're probably right about the reverb, Just sounded cool. LOL


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 15, 2019)

jaketanner said:


> Just sounded cool. LOL



That it does. There are some reverbs that I find it too easy to overdo, such as Valhalla (though I so love their effects). And sometimes I find getting too heavyhanded with the predelay can be disastrous, especially on the bus. Not that I think you did any of that, just sayn'.


----------



## jaketanner (May 15, 2019)

I used VRS24 from Relab...it's a clone of the TC6000...excellent reverb! but I also didn't spend a whole lot of time dialing in the reverb, as it was a test for how they blend together. I might develop this idea into something...then I will mix it properly.. LOL. Thanks for liking it!


----------



## skythemusic (May 15, 2019)

Some of these patches are fantastic! They’re custom or come with the program?



Denkii said:


> HOLY SHIT HE DID IT!
> 
> 
> This made my day sir.


----------



## The Darris (May 15, 2019)

@Cory Pelizzari - Great video on the StWW. Can you do me a favor? If you haven't already, can you send a support ticket to Spitfire about how unbalanced those articulations are concerning volume and dynamic equivalents between instrument? 

I also noticed, in your demonstration of your custom multis, that the patches that utilized either the ostinatum or some arpeggiator script seemed to lack in confident timing. This leads me to believe that the samples don't have very good start times causing a few round robins to stick out as out of time. This was a major issue I had with Studio Strings. Subtle variations in the starting point of those samples is okay for natural humanization but there is a fine line where it goes from sounding like a professional group playing in time to an average high school or middle school group trying to play in time. Couple that issue with any latency you may already have and it just exacerbates a sequencing and programming issue when doing mock ups. 

Anyway, those were just some of the issues with StWW I noticed in your review. You mentioned how unbalanced the dynamic range and volume is between the shorts and longs which, honestly, should be something the devs fix versus you having to spend time on it but the community appreciates it. Spitfire should certainly pay you back for that time, especially if you bought the library. 

As for the other issue I mentioned, you didn't seem to draw any attention to it with your voice over so I don't know if it's something you felt was an issue. I'd be curious to hear your thoughts after spending some time writing some up tempo (140bpm+) Eighth note phrases with the shorts that mix in some 1/16 note patterns as well and lock them to the grid to test out how tight the samples sound. I'm really curious. 

Cheers,

Chris


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (May 15, 2019)

The Darris said:


> If you haven't already, can you send a support ticket to Spitfire about how unbalanced those articulations are concerning volume and dynamic equivalents between instrument?


I just sent a ticket requesting that they fix the volume difference between longs and shorts. It's pretty striking in the solo clarinet.


----------



## Cory Pelizzari (May 15, 2019)

The Darris said:


> @Cory Pelizzari - Great video on the StWW. Can you do me a favor? If you haven't already, can you send a support ticket to Spitfire about how unbalanced those articulations are concerning volume and dynamic equivalents between instrument?
> 
> I also noticed, in your demonstration of your custom multis, that the patches that utilized either the ostinatum or some arpeggiator script seemed to lack in confident timing. This leads me to believe that the samples don't have very good start times causing a few round robins to stick out as out of time. This was a major issue I had with Studio Strings. Subtle variations in the starting point of those samples is okay for natural humanization but there is a fine line where it goes from sounding like a professional group playing in time to an average high school or middle school group trying to play in time. Couple that issue with any latency you may already have and it just exacerbates a sequencing and programming issue when doing mock ups.
> 
> ...


This is a problem that many composers who rely on super tight timing have with Spitfire libraries (and some others) in general. The reason is Spitfire goes for more stylised classical takes rather than super disciplined efficient takes. It does add to the sense of character and realism for the most part but when it comes to fast repeated phrases it sticks out like a sore thumb.

This is something that ultra-clean edited samples can combat, but on the other hand it sucks a little of the life and character out of the samples, so it's always a win/lose situation.

I've been planning to make a handy tips video covering various things one can do with orchestral sounds and layering - one of those things is to layer a synth over the woodwinds to get the tight timing without sacrificing the exposed woodwinds' character, or cut into the sample timing. I'll get around to that eventually.

In the case of creating complex or fast classical orchestrations, it comes down to what players are capable of live as opposed to how they play when being sampled. Essentially what a developer needs to do to get around the tightness issue is to record repetition samples and splice them into re-tongue staccatissimos with round robins. I'm almost 100% sure Alex Wallbank will be doing this for CSW so that may just solve a lot of problems.


----------



## The Darris (May 15, 2019)

Cory Pelizzari said:


> This is a problem that many composers who rely on super tight timing have with Spitfire libraries (and some others) in general. The reason is Spitfire goes for more stylised classical takes rather than super disciplined efficient takes. It does add to the sense of character and realism for the most part but when it comes to fast repeated phrases it sticks out like a sore thumb.
> 
> This is something that ultra-clean edited samples can combat, but on the other hand it sucks a little of the life and character out of the samples, so it's always a win/lose situation.
> 
> ...


I understand that which is why I mentioned that there is a happy medium concerning how to approach that issue. Chamber Strings by Spitfire is a good example of that happy medium. You can write a 1/16 note phrase at a tempo faster than 140 and it still sound tight whilst retaining that natural feel. On the other hand, the newer Studio Strings doesn't quite hold up, even at 120 bpm. Your patches illustrate this issue pretty clearly. I don't know about you but those arpeggiated patches sound like the samples just can't keep up with the pattern you've set. There is either something wrong with your playback or the samples were just cut poorly. Knowing you and the type of videos you do, this suggests its the samples. 

I've had people suggest that I use the "tightness" slider. Well, after having tested that slider on the issue I'm describing on the Studio Strings, it did nothing. All of your positive points are valid and I totally agree with many of the things you've outlined in your review. With that said, I think there are some things I heard in this review that are concerning surrounding the dynamic balance and the way the short articulations have been cut, resulting is timing issues. 

Best,

C


----------



## jaketanner (May 17, 2019)

I hate to resurrect another issue..but this is more of an observation/question than a complaint. Looking for those that have O.T. and SSW...particularly the Bassoon and Contrabassoon. So in the video below, the sound of the bassoon is incredible. Full, thick, warm. I opened up the SStW "pro" and tried to match the sound...not even close. Lacked the body and low warmth...granted NOT a fair comparison here...but wanted to see just how far off the sound was.

Now the question: is this strictly due to the room, or the way SF sampled it? So if anyone has those two libraries, and can try and do an a/b against the video to see if they are closer due to the room, I'd appreciate it. 

BTW...8Dio's Claire Bassoon came very very close in sound...more natural.

To be clear, this is not a complaint...I do like the Studio series a lot, and will get use, and I understand that it's also recorded in a smaller hall, and many wind instruments thrive best when in the right environment...but wanted to ask if this seems to be the case here.

These videos are very telling just how close or far our sample libraries get to the real sound of the instrument. The series is great!


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 17, 2019)

jaketanner said:


> Full, thick, warm. I opened up the SStW "pro" and tried to match the sound...not even close. Lacked the body and low warmth...granted NOT a fair comparison here...but wanted to see just how far off the sound was.
> 
> Now the question: is this strictly due to the room, or the way SF sampled it? So if anyone has those two libraries, and can try and do an a/b against the video to see if they are closer due to the room, I'd appreciate it.



I too consider the bassoon in SStWWs one of the weak points, and always substitute it with the excellent EWHWW version (the Hein is great too, just less warm...messing with EQ is a big part of dealing with Hein instruments anyway). 

I'm not sure why that bassoon is so thin, though I've had success adding a tiny bit of delay and judicious EQ. As mentioned earlier though, it's best to simply substitute that instrument with another dry library.


----------



## jaketanner (May 17, 2019)

Parsifal666 said:


> I'm not sure why that bassoon is so thin



I am starting to really see the importance of the recording space. Never gave it much thought before, and just assumed it was an engineering issue...I've recorded countless instruments in the past, but rarely any orchestral...so I have no comparison. But judging from these videos, and really comparing libraries against each other, I see that the rooms make the sound. I mean, they are all recorded by top engineers...so what's the difference? The space. 

I did confirm though that 8Dio's Clair winds sound as natural to the real thing as I've heard yet. Just wish they had more articulations, but that's not what the library is about...but I can't wait for their Century Winds to be released...I think 8Dio really has a great technique and space to record them in.


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 17, 2019)

jaketanner said:


> I am starting to really see the importance of the recording space. Never gave it much thought before, and just assumed it was an engineering issue...I've recorded countless instruments in the past, but rarely any orchestral...so I have no comparison. But judging from these videos, and really comparing libraries against each other, I see that the rooms make the sound. I mean, they are all recorded by top engineers...so what's the difference? The space.
> 
> I did confirm though that 8Dio's Clair winds sound as natural to the real thing as I've heard yet. Just wish they had more articulations, but that's not what the library is about...but I can't wait for their Century Winds to be released...I think 8Dio really has a great technique and space to record them in.



Sounds to me like you have your substitute.

I've never owned a single library where I didn't have to substitute at least one instrument; which (as I think ism mentioned before) is part of the "good" side of having more than one dry and wet libraries. Just my opinion.


----------



## jaketanner (May 17, 2019)

Parsifal666 said:


> Sounds to me like you have your substitute.
> 
> I've never owned a single library where I didn't have to substitute at least one instrument; which (as I think ism mentioned before) is part of the "good" side of having more than one dry and wet libraries. Just my opinion.



The Claire are only solo...mostly for exposed work...not really for ensemble. But between the 4 wind libraries I have (2 are low-end), I can make something work...LOL Maybe CSB is going to be the winner...but when I got word that might be released at the end of the year, I didn't feel I could wait that long.


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 17, 2019)

jaketanner said:


> The Claire are only solo...mostly for exposed work...not really for ensemble. But between the 4 wind libraries I have (2 are low-end), I can make something work...LOL Maybe CSB is going to be the winner...but when I got word that might be released at the end of the year, I didn't feel I could wait that long.



Oh, I thought you had EWHWWs. Then I should mention: if you want to pick up a really good library for not much, EWHWWs is the one. Granted, a couple of the instruments are daff...so it's no different than any other library right? lol

EWHWWs has got some seriously strong points (right off the bat the bassoon and legato clarinet)...for a dry library it's a ridiculous steal at the price. Either try it out for cheap via Composer Cloud or buy the whole damn thing for cheap whilst you wait for CSB.

Trust me Jake, you will not regret getting the EW.


----------



## jaketanner (May 17, 2019)

Parsifal666 said:


> Oh, I thought you had EWHWWs. Then I should mention: if you want to pick up a really good library for not much, EWHWWs is the one. Granted, a couple of the instruments are daff...so it's no different than any other library right? lol
> 
> EWHWWs has got some seriously strong points (right off the bat the bassoon and legato clarinet)...for a dry library it's a ridiculous steal at the price. Either try it out for cheap via Composer Cloud or buy the whole damn thing for cheap whilst you wait for CSB.
> 
> Trust me Jake, you will not regret getting the EW.



I have the sub from time to time. I considered just using that when I needed to and wait until CSW comes out. Bit went against it. Never got along with the EW samples and for sure don’t wanna deal with Play. I like Kontakts convenience and relatively small CPU footprint.


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 17, 2019)

jaketanner said:


> for sure don’t wanna deal with Play. I like Kontakts convenience and relatively small CPU footprint.



I completely feel your pain with Play. Can't blame you.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (May 17, 2019)

Parsifal666 said:


> I completely feel your pain with Play. Can't blame you.



I must be one of the few left on the planet that likes using Play, I’ve honestly never had an issue since it’s first release.


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 17, 2019)

Wolfie2112 said:


> I must be one of the few left on the planet that likes using Play, I’ve honestly never had an issue since it’s first release.



You are a fortunate person. I never liked the Play gui, and still experience fairly persistent nuisances like hanging notes (to mention just one).


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (May 17, 2019)

For those who use UACC in Spitfire Studio Woodwinds, Long SFZ is 18.

For some reason Spitfire doesn't print this in the manual and the support team doesn't seem to know that Long Sforzando was even assigned a UACC value in SStW.

EDIT: I uploaded a screenshot of all the UACC values that I'm using for SStW, just in case it might save some other people a little time.


----------



## Robert_G (Jul 16, 2019)

So, I bought the core during the wish list sale...had it for sometime now....used it lots... and as much as I have wanted these to work, I regret not buying the pro. Trying to make the single mic work in a mix has me pulling my hair out.* I love the sound, I love the programming, I love the articulations. *I'm more than confident the pro would be just fine, but no matter what I do with the settings, trying to position the sound properly in a mix with the one mic in the core version just isn't working....especially the Flutes A3 which is my most used instrument in the library.

Will be upgrading immediately when the next sale happens. I do really like these woodwinds though.


----------



## Parsifal666 (Jul 17, 2019)

Robert_G said:


> So, I bought the core during the wish list sale...had it for sometime now....used it lots... and as much as I have wanted these to work, I regret not buying the pro. Trying to make the single mic work in a mix has me pulling my hair out.* I love the sound, I love the programming, I love the articulations. *I'm more than confident the pro would be just fine, but no matter what I do with the settings, trying to position the sound properly in a mix with the one mic in the core version just isn't working....especially the Flutes A3 which is my most used instrument in the library.
> 
> Will be upgrading immediately when the next sale happens. I do really like these woodwinds though.



I really like them too...you'll be delighted with the Pro. There really is a big difference.

Too bad about NFR Spitfire, I'd love to get rid of Studio Brass Pro lol. Worse library I've bought in years.


----------



## jbuhler (Jul 17, 2019)

Parsifal666 said:


> Too bad about NFR Spitfire, I'd love to get rid of Studio Brass Pro lol. Worse library I've bought in years


Studio Brass Pro has been working well enough for me as a supplement to Symphonic Brass, and with little fuss except getting the shorts and longs properly balanced. But I haven’t found that it stands well as a library on its own.


----------



## Parsifal666 (Jul 17, 2019)

jbuhler said:


> Studio Brass Pro has been working well enough for me as a supplement to Symphonic Brass, and with little fuss except getting the shorts and longs properly balanced. But I haven’t found that it stands well as a library on its own.



My worse purchase since buying EVO I after EVOs 2 and 3 (or it might have been Albion One, my timeline is freaky lol). As soon as I started (of necessity) replacing the SStB Pro with EWH and the MAs...forget SStB, people. 

The only thing I half like were the bells up passages. 

I actually use my BHCT 8 Horn passages one helluva lot more than anything from SStB.

Once again, I can't believe it but SStWWs have replaced the Hein for me (and I had a MAJOR love affair with the Hein...for years). Only thing I can see replacing them is OT Berlin...but that can wait for now.


----------

