# Spitfire and bug fixes



## jamie8 (Sep 22, 2022)

Is it just me ....or does it seem like Spitfire audio takes a long time for bug repair of current and even non current,... and seems to put more effort into releasing new and shiny library's instead? Abbey road Two ..is to me a case in point.
perhaps i am being picky ?


----------



## cqd (Sep 22, 2022)

It's just you..


----------



## AMBi (Sep 22, 2022)

Seems to be a pretty common complaint around here so probably doesn’t need its own thread since it’s kinda beaten to death at this point.


----------



## mussnig (Sep 22, 2022)

jamie8 said:


> Is it just me ....or does it seem like Spitfire audio takes a long time for bug repair of current and even non current,... and seems to put more effort into releasing new and shiny library's instead? Abbey road Two ..is to me a case in point.
> perhaps i am being picky ?


Sadly yes. I remember reporting bugs for some Kontakt libraries more than a year ago (probably nearly two by now) and some of them were acknowledged by support. Still no updates on these.

What is even more disappointing is the fact that the reported problems are things that should be pretty easy fixes (like legato samples that are not loaded for certain signals, sliders that don't behave as expected, etc.) and updates should not concern the samples at all (thus the cost of server bandwith for distributing the updates should not be a concern).


----------



## tcb (Sep 22, 2022)

Yes,It seems they repair the bugs by release a new product


mussnig said:


> Sadly yes. I remember reporting bugs for some Kontakt libraries more than a year ago (probably nearly two by now) and some of them were acknowledged by support. Still no updates on these.
> 
> What is even more disappointing is the fact that the reported problems are things that should be pretty easy fixes (like legato samples that are not loaded for certain signals, sliders that don't behave as expected, etc.) and updates should not concern the samples at all (thus the cost of server bandwith for distributing the updates should not be a concern).


I reported some bugs too,they didn't fix it yet.At least they fairly treat their customers.😂


----------



## Henu (Sep 23, 2022)

I made them a video last november on using CC2 on vibrato breaking SSS completely. They confirmed the bug, but it's been almost a year now without nothing happening.


----------



## Taron (Sep 23, 2022)

Almost ironic, I kinda have to say, because when I reported some bugs on LABS, they got fixed fairly quickly. But, honestly, considering the quality of BBCSO and how wonderful and reliable it is to work with it, I guess they're most on top with their own player. I do feel like I'd want to shield them a little for some reason. They put out gorgeous stuff. Everyone is struggling in one way or another, which is probably why they seem most keen on adding new libraries. With enough motivation for their pretty well deserved pride, I'm sure they'll make sure to squash them bugs more swiftly.

In the meantime, just don't get too hung up on a bug while you're waiting for a fix and work with what you love about a library. I'm sure there is plenty!


----------



## RogiervG (Sep 23, 2022)

Taron said:


> I do feel like I'd want to shield them a little for some reason. They put out gorgeous stuff. Everyone is struggling in one way or another, which is probably why they seem most keen on adding new libraries. With enough motivation for their pretty well deserved pride, I'm sure they'll make sure to squash them bugs more swiftly.
> 
> In the meantime, just don't get too hung up on a bug while you're waiting for a fix and work with what you love about a library. I'm sure there is plenty!


Well, kind of disagree.
Developers/publishers are responsible for proper products (products should work as advertised/suggested). If they lack motivation in fixing reported issues, there isn't any reason for shielding them (they are a business, not your friend). They are simply not doing proper business in supporting/aftersales of diverse products, and customers are in their right to complain about it. It's also very reasonable (legally even), to ask for fixes in a certain timeframe, based on the financial investments done by the customers (especially the more expensive investments).
Yes, they make good to (on occassion) very good libraries (in general), still they should fix reported issues in a reasonable timeframe (which they now often don't) or provide a roadmap for the fix. If they cannot fix it, they should change their product information accordingly. Think a textblock of known issues on the main productpage, or pricepoint changes or combinations. Or mark it as EOL (no more fixes or updates), or explain the future of the product clearly: what does and does not get fixed/updates. The customer should know what they are getting into and what to expect.
None of the products on the website are EOL or limited supported (on the way out), they are all actively supported.
And yes, people are entitled to get hung up on a bug or two, if that is a sort of dealbreaking thing (considering the pricepoint or usecase), especially if they've reported it several times over a long timespan (and has been acknowlegded by spitfire), and no fix on the horizon. 

TLDR: yes, they have nice libraries, pay active royalties to musicians featuring on their libraries, have a great community etc. and i applaud them for those things.
But bug fixes on (non free) products should not be forgotten or dismissed by them in any case for as long as the products are actively supported by them.


----------



## Taron (Sep 23, 2022)

RogiervG said:


> Well, kind of disagree.
> Developers/publishers are responsible for proper products (products should work as advertised/suggested). If they lack motivation in fixing reported issues, there isn't any reason for shielding them (they are a business, not your friend). They are simply not doing proper business in supporting/aftersales of diverse products, and customers are in their right to complain about it. It's also very reasonable (legally even), to ask for fixes in a certain timeframe, based on the financial investments done by the customers (especially the more expensive investments).
> Yes, they make good to (on occassion) very good libraries (in general), still they should fix reported issues in a reasonable timeframe (which they now often don't) or provide a roadmap for the fix. If they cannot fix it, they should change their product information accordingly. Think a textblock of known issues on the main productpage, or pricepoint changes or combinations. Or mark it as EOL (no more fixes or updates), or explain the future of the product clearly: what does and does not get fixed/updates. The customer should know what they are getting into and what to expect.
> None of the products on the website are EOL or limited supported (on the way out), they are all actively supported.
> ...


Of course, anybody understands your point, there's no question there. It's just too easy to jump with anger at these things and that anger properly motivates you to report a bug, which is great. All I'm really saying is that once you've reported it and it's out of your hands, try to let go for a bit for your own sake above all else. 
But, really, I should completely shut up about these things, because I literally only ever got BBCSO Core thanks to a generous gift of a friend. For too many years now I couldn't have bought anything like it and therefore wouldn't know the same rage as you do. If I had paid $1000+ on a library and there was a bug in it and that bug literally was in my way of doing something....mmmjjjeeeehhhhh, yah, I'd flip out a bit too for some time. 

Anyway, find love in your heart, patience and wisdom and be sure you've made your point about the bug on their forum quite clearly! 
The more clear and obvious the bug is, the more likely they will have to get at it, too.


----------



## Mike Stone (Sep 23, 2022)

jamie8 said:


> Is it just me ....or does it seem like Spitfire audio takes a long time for bug repair of current and even non current,... and seems to put more effort into releasing new and shiny library's instead? Abbey road Two ..is to me a case in point.
> perhaps i am being picky ?


I kinda agree with you, but this is the issue with a large company like SA. They need that continuous revenue stream to fund employees and create more ambitious libraries. All the bigger and smaller library releases fund the next level stuff, like their upcoming modular orchestra. SA makes plenty of great libraries, but there are obviously different development teams. AR-1 and Appassionata have been very polished overall, certain other libraries in recent years not so much.

I also bought AR-2 Professional, and ended up deleting it. AB-2 has too many annoying bugs and quirks for my taste. Sacconi Quartet is probably a better purchase at this point. I recently contacted Spitfire support, who told me that they are still working on the AR-2 patch. Considering how many issues that library has, it's going to be a major one, so it'll take time. When it finally comes out, who knows...


----------



## Pablocrespo (Sep 23, 2022)

I think that if you don’t allow you to return or resell the products, bug fixing should be a top priority

I’ve said it before…it should be ilegal to sale something not resellable or refundable and just ignore the bugs. 

It seems I simply don’t like that business model, I stopped buying spitfire products for that reason. (And I have a lot of them)

I cannot understand the level of customer care they offer being a large company, compared to some of the competition, which are a small team or even work alone (css, audiobro, infinite)


----------



## Mike Fox (Sep 23, 2022)

You’re not being picky.

Spitfire has always been notorious for constantly releasing libraries, while their many bugs or requested updates continue to pile up.

That’s not to say they never update anything, because they do, but It seems like in order for them to maintain their juggernaut of a business model they have to constantly pump out fresh libraries, which may ultimately prevent them from taking any significant time to address those bugs and updates.


----------



## Rudianos (Sep 23, 2022)

AR2 many pro mics remain un useable - easy fixes. Many tickets open. All they say is they do it based on number of requests. LOL no respect for their products past launch date. Never buying from them again.


----------



## Wunderhorn (Sep 23, 2022)

jamie8 said:


> Is it just me ....or does it seem like Spitfire audio takes a long time for bug repair of current and even non current,... and seems to put more effort into releasing new and shiny library's instead? Abbey road Two ..is to me a case in point.
> perhaps i am being picky ?


You are not picky. It is true. Spitfire is producing a lot of abandon-ware.
There are bugs confirmed by Spitfire support in multiple libraries that I have and that have not been fixed in years. It really slowed down my enthusiasm for new releases by them.


----------



## Mike Stone (Sep 23, 2022)

Rudianos said:


> AR2 many pro mics remain un useable - easy fixes. Many tickets open. All they say is they do it based on number of requests. LOL no respect for their products past launch date. Never buying from them again.


Then there are bad velocity and vibrato transitions, unbalanced ensemble patches, sound artifacts with legato patches etc. That library needed several more months in the oven. and doesn't compare quality-wise to AR-1 IMO. Then there are the character piano libraries that consistently have weak higher octaves, which limits their usefulness for more dynamic and "pianistic" playing - but their response is "this is how we want it".

So yeah, I love much of what Spitfire makes, but it's definitely a risk involved buying from them. Several of my purchases I ended up deleting from my SSD, from simply having too many issues, some of which would be quite easy to fix. Not saying other sample library manufactures release undercooked stuff too, but Spitfire releases so many libraries. You kinda feel they would be better off making fewer libraries, and up the prices a bit if necessary. I'd rather pay OT type of prices, but avoid some of these half-baked releases that only end up collecting digital dust, with no money back option.


----------



## Rudianos (Sep 23, 2022)

Mike Stone said:


> Then there are bad



Yeah as I linger in the space of virtual instruments longer I'm getting way more choosy on products based off of
company policies. For me orchestral tools products have generally been very good but I really don't like the brass quirks. SINE. The ones that have their own proprietary systems have got to start stepping up. Or giving the buyer an out! Back to spitfire I really do like AR2. But something that would take 2 hours to do I mean really 2 hours... Not getting done in 9 months... No words.


----------



## blaggins (Sep 23, 2022)

You are definitely not alone. I consider myself a pretty big fan of Spitfire, partly for how they manage their educational/tutorial "arm" which is generally an excellent resource for beginners that has no parallels across any other developer, and partly just because their libraries sound so damn good. I also stick with them because I remain unconvinced that anyone else is doing a meaningfully better job of it all... if a library developer came along that clearly improved my user experience of creating virtual orchestrations I'd probably be all over it, but everything out there seems to come with its own unique compromises. Sometimes I am very tempted (looking at you CSS) but I am leery of the "grass is greener on the other side" fallacy. So I always talk myself down and try to be happy about how I have a ton of libraries that all sound great together.

That being said I am increasingly frustrated, mainly at myself, that I jumped on the BBCSO Pro bandwagon. I did it with this "feel good optimism" that they will soon be rolling out major feature updates to their player, to get parity with basic Kontakt features like sample purge. This has not happened for 2+ years now, and my observation is that instead of improving their code base and rolling updates across their many Spitfire Player libraries, they are instead releasing a new forked/modded version of their own sample player for each new release. Every time a new SA library comes out, another version of their player joins an increasingly long list of extremely similar players... at this point I am all out of optimism that they will ever be able to roll out a big sweeping feature like sample purge since updating all the players, and regression testing all the players, turns into a bigger job for them every month.


----------



## OleJoergensen (Sep 23, 2022)

Henu said:


> I made them a video last november on using CC2 on vibrato breaking SSS completely. They confirmed the bug, but it's been almost a year now without nothing happening.


Im glad to read this. Ive experienced it too. Because of an other library a fader was set to cc2 and by accident I used it with SSS and SSS just stopped working. I had to reload SSS. A very annoying bug.


----------



## Mike Stone (Sep 23, 2022)

OleJoergensen said:


> Im glad to read this. Ive experienced it too. Because of an other library a fader was set to cc2 and by accident I used it with SSS and SSS just stopped working. I had to reload SSS. A very annoying bug.


I made a ticket regarding the violins 2 performance legato patch, and received an updated patch from Spitfire customer support, that was a big improvement. Spitfire Audio has a very helpful and courteous customer support, but this patch was made a couple of years ago, and it still hasn't been released in an official update afaik. You could try writing an email. Spitfire might be sitting on an internal fix, that hasn't been released yet as part of a large patch release.


----------



## robgb (Sep 23, 2022)

Wunderhorn said:


> It really slowed down my enthusiasm for new releases by them.


My enthusiasm slowed down when they abandoned Kontakt.


----------



## jbuhler (Sep 23, 2022)

Mike Stone said:


> I kinda agree with you, but this is the issue with a large company like SA. They need that continuous revenue stream to fund employees and create more ambitious libraries. All the bigger and smaller library releases fund the next level stuff, like their upcoming modular orchestra. SA makes plenty of great libraries, but there are obviously different development teams. AR-1 and Appassionata have been very polished overall, certain other libraries in recent years not so much.
> 
> I also bought AR-2 Professional, and ended up deleting it. AB-2 has too many annoying bugs and quirks for my taste. Sacconi Quartet is probably a better purchase at this point. I recently contacted Spitfire support, who told me that they are still working on the AR-2 patch. Considering how many issues that library has, it's going to be a major one, so it'll take time. When it finally comes out, who knows...


I'm not sure Sacconi is any better to be honest. It has different problems from AB-2 but it has plenty of issues, especially lots of inconsistencies within and especially across instruments. I find the SF Solo Strings are much better in most respects.


----------



## Zedcars (Sep 24, 2022)

RogiervG said:


> TLDR: yes, they have nice libraries, pay active royalties to musicians featuring on their libraries, have a great community etc. and i applaud them for those things.
> But bug fixes on (non free) products should not be forgotten or dismissed by them in any case for as long as the products are actively supported by them.


TLDR


----------



## Loïc D (Sep 24, 2022)

OleJoergensen said:


> Im glad to read this. Ive experienced it too. Because of an other library a fader was set to cc2 and by accident I used it with SSS and SSS just stopped working. I had to reload SSS. A very annoying bug.


Some developer are reserving CCs allocation for the inner mechanics of their libraries (This is the case for SA in Kontakt, can’t speak for native player).
At any rate you should check their documentation to see which CCs are allowed and which are reserved.

It just got on the top of my head when reading this message but maybe there’s indeed a bug in the library (that I don’t own).


----------



## Mike Stone (Sep 24, 2022)

jbuhler said:


> I'm not sure Sacconi is any better to be honest. It has different problems from AB-2 but it has plenty of issues, especially lots of inconsistencies within and especially across instruments. I find the SF Solo Strings are much better in most respects.


Good to know, thanks. I haven't worked with Sacconi, but I really like the (more traditional) core sound of it. AB-2 has great potential though, we'll see how the update turns out...


----------



## jbuhler (Sep 24, 2022)

Mike Stone said:


> Good to know, thanks. I haven't worked with Sacconi, but I really like the (more traditional) core sound of it. AB-2 has great potential though, we'll see how the update turns out...


Sacconi does have a good sound. And it is quite capable of sounding like a quartet. It’s just not always easy getting there. There’s also the issue of strange limitations. The cello only goes to A above middle C. The viola, which is otherwise the favorite viola I own, is inexplicably missing trills, and so forth…


----------



## MartinH. (Sep 24, 2022)

jbuhler said:


> I find the SF Solo Strings are much better in most respects.


Good to know! I only own their solo strings and it has colored my opinion of spitfire quite positively compared to lets say... what I own from orchestral tools.


----------



## jbuhler (Sep 24, 2022)

My Pandemic Fragments thread shows a number of different quartet combinations, including the SF Solo Strings, Berlin FC, Xsample Contemporary Solo Strings, and Sacconi Quartet.


----------



## walkaschaos (Sep 24, 2022)

Then on the other end you have companies like ProjectSam, still releasing HUGE (FREE) updates to products from 2008. Spitfire has some amazing sounds but yeah the business model is a bit shit.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic (Sep 24, 2022)

walkaschaos said:


> Then on the other end you have companies like ProjectSam, still releasing HUGE (FREE) updates to products from 2008. Spitfire has some amazing sounds but yeah the business model is a bit shit.


Spitfire has also released huge free updates for things like Hans Zimmer Strings, so your example doesn’t quite hold up. They are also still releasing updates and fixes for libraries like SSS and SCS. They’re just very slow.


----------



## jbuhler (Sep 24, 2022)

ALittleNightMusic said:


> Spitfire has also released huge free updates for things like Hans Zimmer Strings, so your example doesn’t quite hold up. They are also still releasing updates and fixes for libraries like SSS and SCS. They’re just very slow.


My sense is that they are slower about these sorts of fixes than they used to be. Historically many SF updates have been very extensive. They are also managing many more libraries these days.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic (Sep 24, 2022)

jbuhler said:


> My sense is that they are slower about these sorts of fixes than they used to be. Historically many SF updates have been very extensive. They are also managing many more libraries these days.


Yes, the downsides of scale. They also released some extensive updates for BBCSO (last year?).


----------



## Martin S (Sep 24, 2022)

What? - (what?) - (what?) - (what?) - (what?) - (What?) - (What?)…..

- Sorry ! - I didn’t mean to interrupt your Echo Chamber session… Carry on with -yet- another pointless Spitfire bashing thread, of which the argumentation has already been beaten to death, ad nauseam….

Tiresome.


----------



## RogiervG (Sep 24, 2022)

Martin S said:


> What? - (what?) - (what?) - (what?) - (what?) - (What?) - (What?)…..
> 
> - Sorry ! - I didn’t mean to interrupt your Echo Chamber session… Carry on with -yet- another pointless Spitfire bashing thread, of which the argumentation has already been beaten to death, ad nauseam….
> 
> Tiresome.


it's been a while since the complaint has been brought up, though..  soo..... yeah, there's that.
Also, you don't have to read it, or respond to it, it you think it's useless, or "echo chamber" like.


----------



## Robert_G (Sep 24, 2022)

jamie8 said:


> Is it just me ....or does it seem like Spitfire audio takes a long time for bug repair of current and even non current,... and seems to put more effort into releasing new and shiny library's instead? Abbey road Two ..is to me a case in point.
> perhaps i am being picky ?


You'll notice around here that for most (but not all), Spitfire Audio is either loved or loathed.
*For me it's....loath.*

Overpriced, bugs galore that are rarely fixed, poor quality control, and a new shiny library every week for dinner. I also get the impression they are in love with themselves. Kind of like the guy who thinks every woman he meets wants to marry him. Spitfire just comes across that way to me.

Spitfire libraries are also unnecessary. You don't need them to make good music.

I use the VSL Synchron Stage Orchestra when doing Symphony Orchestra music. It's perfect for that.
I use Cinematic Studios because they are simply unmatched by anyone when it comes to that 'Hall' type sound used for soundtrack type music, etc. The sound and smoothness are as good as it gets.

I also have Eduardo Tarilonte, and Ethera for more of the unique stuff. Serves all my needs.
The rest is filled in all the stuff I bought from 8Dio at their crazy flash sales. I have a few other libraries like Genesis, Olympus, Light & Sound Chamber strings, etc which I use a lot too.

With that said, I don't need overpriced, abandoned libraries from Spitfire Audio. And let's not forget that the Spitfire Player is a disaster. No thanks.


----------



## Martin S (Sep 24, 2022)

RogiervG said:


> it's been a while since the complaint has been brought up, though..  soo..... yeah, there's that.
> Also, you don't have to read it, or respond to it, it you think it's useless, or "echo chamber" like.


I usually don’t, but the bashing is appearing in almost every Spitfire related thread - and even non-SP threads, too…. And it’s the same shit over and over and over again…and from the same people.

”Repeating the same task, expecting a different result each time is the definition of stupidity”.


----------



## shropshirelad (Sep 24, 2022)

Mike Stone said:


> I also bought AR-2 Professional, and ended up deleting it. AB-2 has too many annoying bugs and quirks for my taste. Sacconi Quartet is probably a better purchase at this point. I recently contacted Spitfire support, who told me that they are still working on the AR-2 patch. Considering how many issues that library has, it's going to be a major one, so it'll take time. When it finally comes out, who knows...


It's good to know that they're working on this. I rarely open it mainly because it takes so long to load!


----------



## Henrik B. Jensen (Sep 24, 2022)

Martin S said:


> I usually don’t, but the bashing is appearing in almost every Spitfire related thread - and even non-SP threads, too…. And it’s the same shit over and over and over again…and from the same people.
> 
> ”Repeating the same task, expecting a different result each time is the definition of stupidity”.


On the Latest Posts page, just hit Ignore Thread on threads you have no interest in.

I do that myself


----------



## Taron (Sep 24, 2022)

Wasn't it "insanity"? 
My favorite part is always when folks proclaim they have found the perfect set to make music with and everything else was just nonsense... but then you decide to listen to their music and it's nice. 

If something inspires you, whatever it is, and it gets you to make music from your heart, have real excitement in doing so, well then it is serving its purpose to the fullest.

I remember a long time ago I had the chance to play with a rather expensive library of a company I still appreciate today, but won't dare mention its name (NOT SPITFIRE), and with great passion I used its legato brass ensemble whatever it was and it literally had wrong notes blending somewhere in the upper middle...forgot what it was, eh... E3 to F3 or somewhere around there. And all I thought was: Imagine to have paid $400+ and then this. It was literally not usable. Not like a little bug with some random noises or maybe a wrong layer. Nope, literally two notes crashing and burning with no way around them.
Insane. OH THAT's why I remembered this: "insanity", hahaha.
Point is, despite all that, that company still had and still has probably the most inspiring sound I know and if I could afford it, I'd likely buy their set anyway, hoping that such bugs are no longer in there?! Maybe I'd avoid the brass library, hahahaha.

As for SA, well, I wonder if there was some way to slow them down a little bit and bring them back into reason, but they most certainly have business managers, producers and the likes, justifying every decision by their overhead and all that jazz. I've seen companies explode and their remains crashing and burning, because they got themselves dependent on expanding. It's as deadly an addiction as any. 

I hope they do come to their senses, calm down a little and focus back on bringing their strengths back to a sense of reliability, consistent quality and true customer (or product) care. We all would really lose something precious otherwise. Hyper-expansion is a killer. The pressure, the loss of ability to care it also burns through talents pretty quickly.


----------



## jbuhler (Sep 24, 2022)

Taron said:


> I hope they do come to their senses, calm down a little and focus back on bringing their strengths back to a sense of reliability, consistent quality and true customer (or product) care. We all would really lose something precious otherwise. Hyper-expansion is a killer. The pressure, the loss of ability to care it also burns through talents pretty quickly.


I don't know. SF's production seems pretty regular, about one new product a month, fairly spread out in price, with most under $99, and many under $49, a couple per year in the $200-$400 range, then one maybe two per year higher. It's not really a mark of expansion, but regular production. This production shift happened several years ago, and I haven't seen an acceleration of new production. They have done limited culling of old products and they now offer 50% discounts on select products several times a year, whereas up until recently 40% was the top discount on individual products aside from the Apex sale. OT seems to be following a similar strategy or regularized production and focusing more on lower priced libraries, though OT offers fewer discounts and fewer products overall, and I would imagine they have a smaller full-time staff, so do not need the same sized income stream.


----------



## Taron (Sep 24, 2022)

jbuhler said:


> I don't know. SF's production seems pretty regular, about one new product a month, fairly spread out in price, with most under $99, and many under $49, a couple per year in the $200-$400 range, then one maybe two per year higher. It's not really a mark of expansion, but regular production. This production shift happened several years ago, and I haven't seen an acceleration of new production. They have done limited culling of old products and they now offer 50% discounts on select products several times a year, whereas up until recently 40% was the top discount on individual products aside from the Apex sale. OT seems to be following a similar strategy or regularized production and focusing more on lower priced libraries, though OT offers fewer discounts and fewer products overall, and I would imagine they have a smaller full-time staff, so do not need the same sized income stream.


I hope so. As long as this groove of theirs won't generate too much anger. I'm trying to understand what people here are saying. I haven't followed the whole scene as intensely as I begin to do for about a year now. It felt to me that SA (or SP? Whatever, Spitfire Audio) is indeed pushing out more and more products, like there was an increase in pace. I remember much larger gaps in major releases. But then maybe they've just manage to make more releases "appear" major?! 

I used to think that they created true bread&butter libraries, like truly elegant solutions to virtual orchestras with the goal of getting them more and more refined, dynamic and flexible. But now it seems like the goal is to get the most contemporary "presets" into the scene, allowing the "busy composers" to get the new "current standard sound" into their arrangements. Like a sort of struggle to fight against the rigidity of sample libraries by scrambling to get wilder articulations into them and so on...
...don't know, but it makes me squint a little, cringe a bit and worry about where this all is headed.

Reading the above, I'm honestly hoping that the truly reasonable requests will get heard and taken care of, especially the purging of unused samples. That's probably not as easy as some may think. They may not have figured out the most elegant way of making this work right?! And after that I'd hope that they would totally round up the BBCSO set with a mirror of it in Chamber style or straight up solos. As few tracks as I've made with it, I already wished I could've replaced sections with solos or augmented them with the same beautiful simplicity in use of what's there already.
Bread & butter isn't done, yet! That's what I'm thinking. 
Could be a competition thing, too, come to think of it. VSL probably has the most wholesome b&b collection and more in a quality that may be hard to beat? I've never had the privilege of using those, but what a dear friend of mine does with that stuff is unbelievably beautiful and convincing.

Holy heck, I'm rambling on, sorry...


----------



## Virtuoso (Sep 24, 2022)

I found a solution to this. I don't buy their stuff anymore.


----------



## jbuhler (Sep 24, 2022)

Taron said:


> I hope so. As long as this groove of theirs won't generate too much anger. I'm trying to understand what people here are saying. I haven't followed the whole scene as intensely as I begin to do for about a year now. It felt to me that SA (or SP? Whatever, Spitfire Audio) is indeed pushing out more and more products, like there was an increase in pace. I remember much larger gaps in major releases. But then maybe they've just manage to make more releases "appear" major?!


They've been releasing the AR selections, which seem major even though they are a series of $49 libraries. But some releases that we organize as though they are major turn out not to be, like the originals choir. (It's a very nice choir for $29.) It is true that they at one time had longer times between releases. But I think it's been at least three years that they have been doing the monthly release thing. My brain is fried from the pandemic though, so I don't really recall temporal details like this as well as I used to.

I think what these threads are usually about is some folks want SF to be organized differently, to have different priorities. Some dislike SF marketing (that they market at all). I basically like their instruments and they suit the music I write, so the other stuff—like the irritating player, the lack of purging—remains small stuff to me. I understand why others might feel differently, and given that you can't try before you buy I understand why these threads recur. It's a customer policy that is inevitably going to cause some anger when things don't work as expected. I don't always get why folks think SF should make sample libraries with different priorities and aesthetic commitments (fewer flautandos! bigger brass!) since there are plenty of other companies making libraries that suit those musicalities. And unlike some of the other issues, the priorities and aesthetic commitments are fully evident in the walkthroughs, demos, and other materials on the product page.


----------



## Daniel James (Sep 24, 2022)

Fixing bugs doesn't make more money. New products do. The ol Spitfire way.


----------



## RogiervG (Sep 24, 2022)

Martin S said:


> ”Repeating the same task, expecting a different result each time is the definition of stupidity”.



it's insanity, not stupidity . but i get your point


----------



## RogiervG (Sep 24, 2022)

Daniel James said:


> Fixing bugs doesn't make more money. New products do. The ol Spitfire way.


depends. having good fixes, can result in more sales (reputation a company has, can influence sales)


----------



## Daniel James (Sep 24, 2022)

RogiervG said:


> depends. having good fixes, can result in more sales (reputation a company has, can influence sales)


Much in the way not fixing them has the same effect. Do you predict more sales from a bug fix or from a new product? I feel the answer there is obvious, which is why we see more of the latter.....because it's $pitfire we are talking about here.


----------



## Kony (Sep 24, 2022)

SA had a reputation for not fixing bugs in their libraries long before CH and PT sold the company - which predates the current trend of continuous library releases. So I wouldn't say this is the reason why bugs don't get fixed. After all, if sales are good, and the company is popular, why would they have to fix anything. Not saying I agree with this - I've also stopped buying SA libraries after I bought SCS on CH's recommendation as the best SA library, only to find it unusable (or usable with too much effort).


----------



## Robert_G (Sep 24, 2022)

Sorry, but when you look at the hundreds of hours of work that Alex just put into CSS for free which was already a best in class library......and then look at a company like Spitfire that abandons libraries that are more expensive than CSS......I guess some people can't see the forest for the trees....


----------



## puremusic (Sep 24, 2022)

> SA had a reputation for not fixing bugs in their libraries long before CH and PT sold the company - which predates the current trend of continuous library releases.


I do feel bug fixing of older libraries is far too low on the priority list for Spitfire, when simple fixes don't get done. They need more people working on that. It's bad for retaining customers and bad for PR, to put it from a business point of view.

That said, who owns the company nowadays? I had thought Christian and Paul farmed out the work of running it to that marketing guy as CEO but actually still had ownership, but that was just my impression, what's the story?


----------



## Mike Fox (Sep 24, 2022)

ALittleNightMusic said:


> Spitfire has also released huge free updates for things like Hans Zimmer Strings, so your example doesn’t quite hold up. They are also still releasing updates and fixes for libraries like SSS and SCS. They’re just very slow.


I think his example holds up just fine.

ProjectSAM has not only fixed bugs, and provided its users with additional free content over the years, but also just did a massive overhaul with their GUI that’s honestly light years ahead of anything Spitfire has ever done regarding design and functionality.

Easy win for ProjectSAM for taking much better care of their libraries and customers over the years.


----------



## NekujaK (Sep 24, 2022)

Spitfire have definitely carved a special place for themselves as a library developer. Beyond just the quality and scope of their libraries, I think a lot of it has to do with their well-produced walkthrough videos. Stay with me on this for a minute...

After watching their videos now for several years, I feel like I know Paul, Christian, Homay, and others. They've managed to create a very sincere, consistent, and musical showcase for their libraries and their company thru these videos, and a big part of it is their personal, yet professional, presentation style. There is no other developer out there, big or small, who has achieved this on the level that Spitfire has.

So when the sincere passion for their products that's evident in those videos is juxtaposed against pretentious marketing campaigns, lack of timely bug fixes, and a player that exhibits many obvious flaws, things kind of start to sour. How can they be so pleased with themselves when their existing products have significant bugs that haven't been addressed in ages (or at least in a timely manner)?

Now when I watch a new walkthru video, I kind of feel like yelling at the screen, "But what about fixing AR2!!??", "How about addressing your messed up player!!??", etc. Because after a while, the puffed up pride that's paraded in their videos, starts to feel like just a lot of hot air... because either they're turning a blind eye to some arguably serious bugs and shortcomings in their products, or they don't feel bug fixing is important to their business, or they believe they've gotten too big to fail and only do what pleases them.

I don't know 🤷‍♂️ But it's all a bit frustrating and unfortunate.


----------



## Daniel James (Sep 24, 2022)

Martin S said:


> What? - (what?) - (what?) - (what?) - (what?) - (What?) - (What?)…..
> 
> - Sorry ! - I didn’t mean to interrupt your Echo Chamber session… Carry on with -yet- another pointless Spitfire bashing thread, of which the argumentation has already been beaten to death, ad nauseam….
> 
> Tiresome.


Yet here you are.


----------



## jbuhler (Sep 24, 2022)

Mike Fox said:


> I think his example holds up just fine.
> 
> ProjectSAM has not only fixed bugs, and provided its users with additional free content over the years, but also just did a massive overhaul with their GUI that’s honestly light years ahead of anything Spitfire has ever done regarding design and functionality.
> 
> Easy win for ProjectSAM for taking much better care of their libraries and customers over the years.


I don't know. The ProjectSam update does look neat, but honestly it hasn't improved usability for me much at all. (My impression comes from the updates to the first two Symphobias.) I find the new GUI generally at least as confusing as the old one. And this is not an issue of me just being used to the old way. I didn't use PS libraries often because I found the workflow kludgy. I tried the new GUI and still find the workflow kludgy, though prettier to look at. So I suppose there's that.

All the SF SSO and SCS were fairly extensively overhauled when they were converted from BML, they received further updates in the new form, including reworking of the SCS legato. HZ Strings got a major update with new content plus several tweaks of the legato. BBCSO got at least one major update. Those kinds of updates have slowed down the last few years, and that is concerning, but historically SF updated more often than most, and more often than PS updated the Symphobias. 

I actually rather like the SF Kontakt GUI, which suffers only because it's small, an old limitation of Kontakt. (It might be nice if SF updated their Kontakt GUIs to take advantage of the larger format. That seems like it would be minimal work.) I also find SF player fine albeit uninspiring to work with, though it is often also head-scratching in terms of why they made some of the layout decisions they made. But few of them get in the way of finding my way to the functionality I want the way the Symphobias do. Maybe I've been lucky.


----------



## Mike Fox (Sep 24, 2022)

jbuhler said:


> I don't know. The ProjectSam update does look neat, but honestly it hasn't improved usability for me much at all. (My impression comes from the updates to the first two Symphobias.) I find the new GUI generally at least as confusing as the old one. And this is not an issue of me just being used to the old way. I didn't use PS libraries often because I found the workflow kludgy. I tried the new GUI and still find the workflow kludgy, though prettier to look at. So I suppose there's that.
> 
> All the SF SSO and SCS were fairly extensively overhauled when they were converted from BML, they received further updates in the new form, including reworking of the SCS legato. HZ Strings got a major update with new content plus several tweaks of the legato. BBCSO got at least one major update. Those kinds of updates have slowed down the last few years, and that is concerning, but historically SF updated more often than most, and more often than PS updated the Symphobias.
> 
> I actually rather like the SF Kontakt GUI, which suffers only because it's small, an old limitation of Kontakt. (It might be nice if SF updated their Kontakt GUIs to take advantage of the larger format. That seems like it would be minimal work.) I also find SF player fine albeit uninspiring to work with, though it is often also head-scratching in terms of why they made some of the layout decisions they made. But few of them get in the way of finding my way to the functionality I want the way the Symphobias do. Maybe I've been lucky.


I find the new SAM GUI near perfect, and incredibly intuitive. Everything is beautifully laid out and neatly organized, as well as properly labeled. The stage placement option (which is amazing) and all the other added features just makes it really fun and easy to use, imo. But to each their own!

As far as updates go, SAM has gone through several revisions of their Symphobia GUIs, as well as added new content throughout the years. They just happened to get a lot of things right from the get-go, so there just was never much to fix, and is probably why you hardly every saw people complain about their libraries. They just worked.

And has SA really provided more updates than SAM? Possibly. But you do have to take into consideration that SA has a much larger catalog than SAM does, naturally resulting in far more needed updates and bug fixes, which some have people wondering if they’ll ever get fixed.

With SAM it’s always been about quality over quantity. I really don’t think the same can be said about SA, which is exactly why these threads keep popping up.


----------



## RogiervG (Sep 24, 2022)

Daniel James said:


> Much in the way not fixing them has the same effect. Do you predict more sales from a bug fix or from a new product? I feel the answer there is obvious, which is why we see more of the latter.....because it's $pitfire we are talking about here.


i am talking about increase, besides new products.


----------



## Daniel James (Sep 24, 2022)

RogiervG said:


> i am talking about increase, besides new products.


Oh no I get what you mean, but for every one product, they do fix there is like 20 more released in the mean time, most of which need updates of their own. So while in principle I agree that fixing bugs will increase reputation and lead to more sales, that's only works if its consistent, a not replaced by 20 more bugs not being fixed. The more products they add with bugs not being fixed, the less impactful that *one *update will feel across the board.


----------



## jbuhler (Sep 24, 2022)

Mike Fox said:


> They just happened to get a lot of things right from the get-go, so there just was never much to fix, and is probably why you hardly every saw people complain about their libraries. They just worked.


Maybe. I've always found them a major pain to work with—and I do have a lot of their libraries (at least 7—most purchased when they cost a good deal more than they do today). I still use them here and there, and every time it's a struggle. Even after all these years and the update, very little works the way I think it should, and I choose other libraries whenever I can. Finally learned these are just not libraries for me, which is one reason I didn't buy Pandora despite the high praise the library has received. So, no, they don't just work for everyone. (And I believe this is the first time I've complained publicly about them.)


----------



## Henu (Sep 24, 2022)

Loïc D said:


> At any rate you should check their documentation to see which CCs are allowed and which are reserved.


CC2 is allowed, and I've been remapping it as vibrato on pretty much all their libraries for years. 
It's the newest SSS update that broke it on random patches. I just tested it on V1 CTAO performance legato and that's definitely broken when you assign CC2 to vibrato. It basically removes all notes from their assigned key mapping.

However, you don't have to load the patch again @OleJoergensen- I found out by accident that clicking the small CC- button at the bottom restores the mapping.


----------



## OleJoergensen (Sep 25, 2022)

Henu said:


> CC2 is allowed, and I've been remapping it as vibrato on pretty much all their libraries for years.
> It's the newest SSS update that broke it on random patches. I just tested it on V1 CTAO performance legato and that's definitely broken when you assign CC2 to vibrato. It basically removes all notes from their assigned key mapping.
> 
> However, you don't have to load the patch again @OleJoergensen- I found out by accident that clicking the small CC- button at the bottom restores the mapping.


Thank you for sharing, I must remember that.


----------



## ridgero (Sep 25, 2022)

Daniel James said:


> Fixing bugs doesn't make more money. New products do. The ol Spitfire way.



Do you really think so?

Spitfire has released a number of major updates including bug fixes in recent years. For example SSO, SCS, BBC SO and HZ Strings.

Error handling and bug fixing always takes significantly longer than the user can imagine


----------



## Saxer (Sep 25, 2022)

To me it seems like Spitfire (and also 8dio) are going a kind of "evolutional" way. If there are mistakes or bugs in a library they avoid the bugs mostly in their next libraries. So I find their newer libraries much more useful (BBCSO, Appassionata, Originals, LABS) than the older libraries (SCS etc). Not the cheapest way for customers to get there...


----------



## OleJoergensen (Sep 25, 2022)

I feel admiration for sample developer's. They are musician, composers and people who have acquired technic understanding to make sample libraries. I can only imagine what a massive work it must be to make a sample library. Even its often massive amount of work making mock ups- compositions with sample libraries, its inspiring to use these sample libraries and can be an acceptable end product for us who can afford live recording. But never the less, it makes the disappointment as great when reading this thread and other complaints.


----------



## Al Maurice (Sep 25, 2022)

It all depends where the mistakes if you like came from:

So if it's in the way the samples were recorded or engineered, there's probably not much you can do down the line.

If it's due to some programming in the scripts that's a different matter; unless the sampler/player still doesn't allow for that feature.


----------



## Francisco Lamolda (Sep 25, 2022)

Daniel James said:


> Fixing bugs doesn't make more money. New products do. The ol Spitfire way.


I would say that having a good reputation for updating, fixing and taking into consideration suggestions from users also makes money, only in the long run. Maybe CSS is the best example of that. But yeah, you would have to be the best, otherwise it would be just as you say.


----------



## redlester (Sep 25, 2022)

Spitfire went through a year of very few releases, presumably like many companies due to Covid. I get the impression they therefore developed a large backlog because the new releases in 2022 have been pretty relentless.


----------



## Taron (Sep 25, 2022)

I just had this ridiculous idea. Wouldn't it be fun, fascinating and potentially hilarious to have a thread dedicated to jingles that showcase bugs of libraries from any vendor?! Of course, it may be tough to evaluate the validity of every example, but I'd want to count on everyone's sincerity there.
Could be called something like "Bugging Out Loud". Ironically I wouldn't have anything from the top of my head I could contribute, but by the sound of it there are plenty among you, who could!

• Vendor name
• Library name
• Small bug description
• 20 secs of madness to showcase it


----------



## redlester (Sep 25, 2022)

NekujaK said:


> Spitfire have definitely carved a special place for themselves as a library developer. Beyond just the quality and scope of their libraries, I think a lot of it has to do with their well-produced walkthrough videos. .


Funny you should mention that because as discussed elsewhere I feel their more recent walkthroughs have been very perfunctory and don’t have the enthusiasm or charm of some of the ones of old. This has certainly been the case from Polaris onwards.


----------



## OleJoergensen (Sep 25, 2022)

redlester said:


> Funny you should mention that because as discussed elsewhere I feel their more recent walkthroughs have been very perfunctory and don’t have the enthusiasm or charm of some of the ones of old. This has certainly been the case from Polaris onwards.


Maybe its just a natural tiredness after have been doing the same for years…


----------



## Henrik B. Jensen (Sep 25, 2022)

Now we only have to go through 26 smaller product releases until the first part of their new flagship orchestral library has premiere


----------



## yusir (Sep 25, 2022)

I really like the sound of their SSO bundle. But the walkthrough video is like 5 years ago, the new video about the new mics and new updates is 30 minutes of Paul Thompson playing every staccato patch (I love him doing this though). No details of the patch, no comparison.I cannot just pay $2000 on this after watching "The Staccato and Long" video. I have to come here ask anybody who bought it.


----------



## Mike Fox (Sep 25, 2022)

jbuhler said:


> Maybe. I've always found them a major pain to work with—and I do have a lot of their libraries (at least 7—most purchased when they cost a good deal more than they do today). I still use them here and there, and every time it's a struggle. Even after all these years and the update, very little works the way I think it should, and I choose other libraries whenever I can. Finally learned these are just not libraries for me, which is one reason I didn't buy Pandora despite the high praise the library has received. So, no, they don't just work for everyone. (And I believe this is the first time I've complained publicly about them.)


I think something is getting lost in translation here.

I agree that SAM’s libraries don’t work for everyone. That’s fair. But I also wasn’t saying or implying that either.

When I said their libraries “just work”, I was referring more to bugs, programming, quality control, etc. SAM spends far more time making sure their libraries are rock solid, and that all (or most) of the loose ends are tied before releasing a library. They’re also well aware of any bugs that may be present in their libraries, and are generally quick to address them.

This is where SAM tends to outshine SA, regardless of how an individual may or may not gel with their GUI, or functionality/workflow of their libraries.


----------



## thesteelydane (Sep 25, 2022)

Loïc D said:


> Some developer are reserving CCs allocation for the inner mechanics of their libraries (This is the case for SA in Kontakt, can’t speak for native player).
> At any rate you should check their documentation to see which CCs are allowed and which are reserved.
> 
> It just got on the top of my head when reading this message but maybe there’s indeed a bug in the library (that I don’t own).


True, but we usually use CCs that the user is unlikely to use, like the unassigned ones 102-119. I remember looking under the hood in a few Spitfire libs and they used these. CC2 breaking something is very strange.


----------



## mussnig (Sep 25, 2022)

Henu said:


> CC2 is allowed, and I've been remapping it as vibrato on pretty much all their libraries for years.
> It's the newest SSS update that broke it on random patches. I just tested it on V1 CTAO performance legato and that's definitely broken when you assign CC2 to vibrato. It basically removes all notes from their assigned key mapping.
> 
> However, you don't have to load the patch again @OleJoergensen- I found out by accident that clicking the small CC- button at the bottom restores the mapping.


Just to make sure: you didn't by accident assign CC2 to articulation selection by clicking that CC button or to some UACC variant? Because if that's the case it can happen that all articulations of a given patch will be deselected for certain CC2 values which can give the impression that the patch is broken.


----------



## mybadmemory (Sep 25, 2022)

A developer can obviously focus on either making a few core libraries better and better over the years and polish them to perfection, but only have a few solid products.

Or alternatively choose to capture a variety of venues, orchestras, moods, instruments, and experimental sounds, that might not get to the same level of perfection but that will instead offer something else. Variety and experimentation.

To me it’s quite obvious that you can’t do both. Companies aren’t just AIs cranking out stuff according to rules, it’s actual human beings, being human, and making choices and tradeoffs depending on where their own interests, tastes and priorities lie.

Having worked in creative industries my entire career I know that what might from the outside often get interpreted as corporate greed is actually many times rather driven by pure and genuine passion for something.

Spitfire have always seemed to be extremely passionate about capturing new things and offer as much as they can. I don’t see any of these two possible ways as right or wrong, just different things by different people, for different people.


----------



## Pablocrespo (Sep 25, 2022)

mybadmemory said:


> A developer can obviously focus on either making a few core libraries better and better over the years and polish them to perfection, but only have a few solid products.
> 
> Or alternatively choose to capture a variety of venues, orchestras, moods, instruments, and experimental sounds, that might not get to the same level of perfection but that will instead offer something else. Variety and experimentation.
> 
> ...


I think that if you sell a product and don’t allow reselling or refunds, you should pospone release til it works as it should, or make fixing the issues the first priority. 

I imagine what would happen to a media composer carreer if he or she delivers flawed products with the excuse of passion about capturing new things. 

They are a business as we are, and should be treated as such. 

They could avoid this negativity fixing the bugs, listening to their customers about their player, or allow refunds or reselling.


----------



## Henrik B. Jensen (Sep 25, 2022)

mybadmemory said:


> A developer can obviously focus on either making a few core libraries better and better over the years and polish them to perfection, but only have a few solid products.
> 
> Or alternatively choose to capture a variety of venues, orchestras, moods, instruments, and experimental sounds, that might not get to the same level of perfection but that will instead offer something else. Variety and experimentation.
> 
> ...


I don’t think anyone expects Spitfire to polish their libraries to perfection. But when they start using their own sample player instead of Kontakt, it’s not unreasonable to expect basic functionality to be present, I think.

Sample purging still isn’t available in the Spitfire player!


----------



## jbuhler (Sep 25, 2022)

Mike Fox said:


> I think something is getting lost in translation here.
> 
> I agree that SAM’s libraries don’t work for everyone. That’s fair. But I also wasn’t saying or implying that either.
> 
> ...


I suspect you just value different things in libraries than I do. I’ve never really had issues with SF libraries not working for me out of the box. They really do just work for me, which is one reason I like SF libraries so much. So that’s one thing.

Their libraries also fit closely the kind of music I write. The things other folks complain about I rarely encounter. When I’ve found a bug—which I’ll define as the instrument not working in the terms the instrument sets for itself (these are the only sort of bugs you can expect to be fixed)– it’s been quickly addressed by support. The thing that irritates me most about SF instruments is a lack of consistency in programming across instruments of a library so you usually have to refashion your midi fairly extensively for each instrument to get a similar performance and the instruments aren’t always well balanced against each other out of the box. But that’s manageable. It’s also a widespread issue with sample libraries, and it’s worth contemplating why that’s the case. I don’t encounter the issues with mistimed shorts that others do, likely because I’m not writing on the kinds of figures where that’s an issue, and I am writing the kinds of figures where a bit of looseness is useful (and humanizing doesn’t produce at all the same effect). I don’t much encounter the tuning issues, perhaps because I’m lucky, perhaps because I’ve internalized the quirks of the libraries, or because they tend to get washed out in context. I like the SF legato because it’s generally transparent, my music doesn’t generally lean into it, and it generally works to solve the other problems of writing or samples that legato is the least bad solution to, etc. i could go through a litany of such complaints and explain why they don’t rise to being significant issues for me, but the point is that they don’t. 

And so on the whole the libraries just work for me. I don’t have to fight them the way I do other company’s libraries. Yes, that’s for me, mileage varies and all that. No, SF libraries don’t suit everyone and every purpose. That’s to be expected. Their libraries evidently don’t value what you value. ProjectSam libraries evidently do. Nothing wrong with that. But SF libraries value what I value. PS libraries evidently do not. Nothing wrong with that either. 

Indeed I find that a good thing because it speaks to diversity of taste. Technical criteria are rarely just that, especially in the realm of art, and often embed tradeoffs. Universalizing those solutions—this is the right way to cut a sample, make a legato, etc.—rather than treating them as technical choices with real tradeoffs inevitably reduces diversity. Surely one can say “I really don’t like the way SF does things, and their libraries don’t seem to value what I value in music.” And then move on and not buy SF libraries but other companies’ libraries that better reflect your values. That’s how the market works, and within the constraints of what a market can support that’s how diversity gets representation as productive niches. But that is quite different from saying “SF libraries are terrible because they don’t value what I value and they should value what I value because my values are the true universal musical values.” I’m not saying this is what you are saying at all but too often the arguments raised against SF are of this second sort. And then the thread inevitably descends into a death spiral. How could it not when the stakes are the true universal musical values?

Also note that in my complaints against PS that I never said that the libraries were bad because they didn’t suit me and my music. I also didn’t suggest or mean to suggest that the libraries need to be reworked to suit my workflow. I only said that they didn’t especially suit my workflow and that I found them frustrating to work with so I don’t use them much. This was offered in comparison to SF libraries, where I find nothing like this kind of resistance. Personally I think it’s great that others are finding value in the PS libraries and if the new GUI is making them easier for others so they are getting used more that’s all good too. I can’t say that I’m seeing much evidence on the forum that they are being used more now that they have a new GUI, however. The forum is not the world of course, so it’s hard to know what to make of that.


----------



## Axl (Sep 25, 2022)

How to get a developer to fix the bugs? Report them, nag them about the report, and stop buying the new shiny things.


----------



## Henu (Sep 25, 2022)

mussnig said:


> you didn't by accident assign CC2 to articulation selection by clicking that CC button or to some UACC variant?


I'm 100% sure I didn't, but in another situation your post does make sense! However, that wasn't the case here unfortunately- unless that has been somehow baked in to the patch itself. And as I mentioned, Spitfire also acknowledged it being a clear bug when showing them a video.


----------



## Mike Fox (Sep 25, 2022)

jbuhler said:


> I suspect you just value different things in libraries than I do. I’ve never really had issues with SF libraries not working for me out of the box. They really do just work for me, which is one reason I like SF libraries so much. So that’s one thing.
> 
> Their libraries also fit closely the kind of music I write. The things other folks complain about I rarely encounter. When I’ve found a bug—which I’ll define as the instrument not working in the terms the instrument sets for itself (these are the only sort of bugs you can expect to be fixed)– it’s been quickly addressed by support. The thing that irritates me most about SF instruments is a lack of consistency in programming across instruments of a library so you usually have to refashion your midi fairly extensively for each instrument to get a similar performance and the instruments aren’t always well balanced against each other out of the box. But that’s manageable. It’s also a widespread issue with sample libraries, and it’s worth contemplating why that’s the case. I don’t encounter the issues with mistimed shorts that others do, likely because I’m not writing on the kinds of figures where that’s an issue, and I am writing the kinds of figures where a bit of looseness is useful (and humanizing doesn’t produce at all the same effect). I don’t much encounter the tuning issues, perhaps because I’m lucky, perhaps because I’ve internalized the quirks of the libraries, or because they tend to get washed out in context. I like the SF legato because it’s generally transparent, my music doesn’t generally lean into it, and it generally works to solve the other problems of writing or samples that legato is the least bad solution to, etc. i could go through a litany of such complaints and explain why they don’t rise to being significant issues for me, but the point is that they don’t.
> 
> ...


I think this goes beyond just the scope of what we personally value as composers, and the styles of music we tend to gravitate to, because there is a notable and significant problem with SA libraries and bugs/issues.

Even if you aren’t personally effected by it, the problem with SA pumping out libraries faster than they can update them does exist, and it’s becoming more and more apparent as time goes on. This practice is not aging well, and you can see the amount of disgruntled customers just in this thread alone (not to mention all the other countless threads/complaints from high paying and loyal SA customers).

Bugs, updates, poor quality control, etc. are all real elements that exist no matter how we percieve them. This isn’t a subjective issue, and not being personally bothered by it doesn’t make the problem disappear. 

I think @Daniel James was onto something when he said “Fixing bugs doesn't make more money. New products do. The ol Spitfire way.”

That about sums up the situation SA has gotten themselves in. It’s a business model that seems to be working quite well for them, though I can only wonder how sustainable this approach is.


----------



## Taron (Sep 25, 2022)

If Spitfire manages to have their one player for all current and future libraries in a way that they may update the player without troubles, it probably is quite doable to have years of new sample content creation as priority and then months of updating. Seems like this could well be sustainable.

No doubt this (inhouse player) is all still pretty new as it is for most, who got tired of Kontakt matters (whatever those all are. Besides licensing policies, cracks and the likes). Every company tries to figure out their solution to this. I'm assuming we are all still witnessing a growth period of those. Eventually it will all be well, because it simply has to. That's where the original passion becomes the guarantee, I'd like to believe.


----------



## jbuhler (Sep 25, 2022)

Mike Fox said:


> Even if you aren’t personally effected by it, the problem with SA pumping out libraries faster than they can update them does exist, and it’s becoming more and more apparent as time goes on. This practice is not aging well, and you can see the amount of disgruntled customers just in this thread alone (not to mention all the other countless threads/complaints from high paying and loyal SA customers).


I’m not sure about this. I agree updates are coming slower. But I’ve also encountered fewer issues in recent years with new releases, and I have a lot of their libraries. The most significant was a bad tuning issue in Neo. That was quickly fixed. I don’t have AR2, which evidently has some issues. I can’t say in that case whether I would consider it dire or merely irritating. 

Some have had issues with the player and that’s unfortunate of course, but I’ve never had an issue other than the labs sometimes needing to be repaired. But the paid libraries on the player have worked smoothly and flawlessly. The lack of purge doesn’t affect my workflow. The way the player organizes microphones and articulations is comical but still quite useable despite that. I hate the player’s browser. 

I’m not saying these aren’t real issues, but it’s also not clear how many folks are suffering from them. I went years with broken Kontakt libraries from Cinesamples that were completely unusable. I went several months with a Sine library from OT that was broken and would crash Logic. CS was pretty indifferent about the whole thing. OT was more helpful but essentially threw up their hands until a new version of Sine was available. Pretty much any library I’ve used has had one issue or another. SF is not near the top of my list of problem sample developers.

But the thing is these sorts of problems do say a lot about values, where the companies choose to put their resources. I don’t have an issue with the number of libraries SF has been releasing. Many of them have been scoring selections for AROOF and many of the others have been forays into interesting niches. I’ve found it easy to buy some and ignore others, without feeling pressure from marketing or otherwise to get everything. Indeed I would say a bigger issue is that the offerings are now so regular that the premieres feel very mundane and are easier than ever to ignore. I would also say their catalog is becoming increasingly unwieldy and that will require thought on how to present and organize it as they go forward. (The new website is a start but not altogether successful in addressing the issues presented by a large catalog.)

In terms of values I would say SF cares above all about the particularity of sound, about capturing interesting sounds recorded beautifully as they can. The small libraries help them do that while targeting different niches. The big libraries aim at something more thorough but are still focused on the beautifully recorded sound. SF seems less concerned about other things that others value as much or more; SF is content with rough bits in their libraries, so long as as it does not hinder delivering that sound. Approached in one way this can mean a certain disconnected character to the sounds of the library as you string the samples together. Approached in another way you use what the libraries offer to find connective tissue. I find with my music that the latter happens without much conscious effort on my part. 

As for disgruntled customers, here I think you are dealing with the relatively large number of SF users. The size of their customer base is such that some will always be disgruntled. It’s the nature of scale, and the scale means individual complaints won’t necessarily be addressed, in fact likely won’t unless they are seen as representative. If SF is losing customers faster then gaining them, obviously they have a problem. I have not yet seen evidence that that’s the case. Lots of complaints on the forum of course, but I haven’t seen signs the company’s income stream is much changed beyond the general softening of the market that all the companies are experiencing. And SF’s response has been less intense to the softening than most. 

If you are saying you prefer small companies that can respond to individual requests, then I would say SF is not that company any longer. They need too much income to be selling at anything that isn’t scale. So they won’t be that company again. The quote from Daniel is correct that they need large regular income. I’m not convinced about the underlying cynicism. It’s not really because SF is greedy that they need this income but because they now have a very large staff for a sample company. In any case it will be put to the test soon enough when modular AR drops, since that kind of library won’t be able to succeed if it’s not well maintained.


----------



## Mike Fox (Sep 25, 2022)

jbuhler said:


> They need too much income to be selling at anything that isn’t scale. So they won’t be that company again. The quote from Daniel is correct that they need large regular income.


And therein lies the problem. A problem that SA has created for themselves. There are consequences to these types of business models, and a plethora of bugs in their libraries is one of them.

Quantity over quality (especially quality control) has become the SA norm.

It is what it is.


----------



## NoamL (Sep 25, 2022)

@Daniel James maybe as a dev yourself you can speak to this? Suppose you had to put out a bug fix for Alpha+Bravo requiring all customers to download everything again (4.7 GB). How much would it cost you? - like are we talking hundreds of dollars for hosting costs, or thousands or tens of thousands? Thanks for shining some light on this if possible.


----------



## jbuhler (Sep 25, 2022)

Mike Fox said:


> And therein lies the problem. A problem that SA has created for themselves. There are consequences to these types of business models, and a plethora of bugs in their libraries is one of them.
> 
> Quantity over quality (especially quality control) has become the SA norm.
> 
> It is what it is.


You are only seeing the drawbacks and none of the benefits. A sample company that can scale has all sorts benefits, starting with being able to offer a lot more variety, and generally lower costs if they can get the work place structured right. Quantity versus quality is a meaningless opposition unless you bring aesthetic values into it. There’s significant aesthetic value in the new libraries on offer, even if there’s a marginal reduction in QA (I’m unconvinced there has been an erosion of QA). Whatever the case having access to a dozen new libraries that are 99% bug free versus 1 library that is is 99.5% bug free, I’ll take the dozen, thank you very much. There’s an opportunity cost to that very marginal increase in quality. And as I’ve said I’m not convinced that this is even the tradeoff. Any losses from the larger size of SF lie elsewhere. 

Now there are challenges and costs to larger size to be sure. Managing and organizing people into efficient production units is probably the biggest challenge and companies often founder because they fail the task. As the business expands it becomes harder to respond well to individual customers as such (not with support but with a sense that they are being listened to) because the scale of the operation just doesn’t allow it. It’s like requesting that Coke use sugar instead of corn syrup. Even if it’s objectively true that sugar tastes better, your individual complaint to Coke will fall on indifferent ears unless it is seen as broadly representative. And there are in fact people—because of the scale many people—who will argue that corn syrup is preferable. Then, too, company identity becomes more diffuse as there are more people who are tasked with representing it. The catalogue becomes unwieldy. None of the new libraries seems especially special because they are always in the process of announcing something. Then too as a company grows, its governing logic is oriented in the first place around maintaining itself so they will sometimes lose focus because of that.

I haven’t actually seen signs of the latter with SF. Every year I find several new and inspiring libraries they have put out. The last few years they’ve also released instruments I’m not interested in at all, but that doesn’t bother me, as I see it as a sign they continue to look for interesting niches to fill rather than just pumping out more of the same. They do a lot of string libraries and such too, and their love of the flautando seems unabated, so it’s not like they have abandoned the same, but they are also looking for other things.


----------



## Mike Fox (Sep 25, 2022)

jbuhler said:


> You are only seeing the drawbacks and none of the benefits. A sample company that can scale has all sorts benefits, starting with being able to offer a lot more variety, and generally lower costs if they can get the work place structured right. Quantity versus quality is a meaningless opposition unless you bring aesthetic values into it. There’s significant aesthetic value in the new libraries on offer, even if there’s a marginal reduction in QA (I’m unconvinced there has been an erosion of QA). Whatever the case having access to a dozen new libraries that are 99% bug free versus 1 library that is is 99.5% bug free, I’ll take the dozen, thank you very much. There’s an opportunity cost to that very marginal increase in quality. And as I’ve said I’m not convinced that this is even the tradeoff. Any losses from the larger size of SF lie elsewhere.
> 
> Now there are challenges and costs to larger size to be sure. Managing and organizing people into efficient production units is probably the biggest challenge and companies often founder because they fail the task. As the business expands it becomes harder to respond well to individual customers as such (not with support but with a sense that they are being listened to) because the scale of the operation just doesn’t allow it. It’s like requesting that Coke use sugar instead of corn syrup. Even if it’s objectively true that sugar tastes better, your individual complaint to Coke will fall on indifferent ears unless it is seen as broadly representative. And there are in fact people—because of the scale many people—who will argue that corn syrup is preferable. Then, too, company identity becomes more diffuse as there are more people who are tasked with representing it. The catalogue becomes unwieldy. None of the new libraries seems especially special because they are always in the process of announcing something. Then too as a company grows, its governing logic is oriented in the first place around maintaining itself so they will sometimes lose focus because of that.
> 
> I haven’t actually seen signs of the latter with SF. Every year I find several new and inspiring libraries they have put out. The last few years they’ve also released instruments I’m not interested in at all, but that doesn’t bother me, as I see it as a sign they continue to look for interesting niches to fill rather than just pumping out more of the same. They do a lot of string libraries and such too, and their love of the flautando seems unabated, so it’s not like they have abandoned the same, but they are also looking for other things.


I’m focusing on the drawbacks because that’s the topic at hand. 🤷‍♂️

But If you really believe that the pros of a company who spit out more libraries than they can tend to somehow outweighs the downsides, well, then there’s not much I can say to convince you otherwise.

I just can’t pretend that a company who releases a product where corners were obviously cut all in the name of releasing another library next month so that profits are maximized is somehow justifiable, especially when my hard earned money is involved.

But hey, that’s just me.


----------



## jbuhler (Sep 25, 2022)

Mike Fox said:


> I’m focusing on the drawbacks because that’s the topic at hand. 🤷‍♂️
> 
> But If you really believe that the pros of a company who spit out more libraries than they can tend to somehow outweighs the downsides, well, then there’s not much I can say to convince you otherwise.
> 
> ...


Well, yes, if the libraries don't meet your aesthetic values because of where the company makes its tradeoffs, then you really shouldn't buy them. You wouldn't be true to your music if you bought a library that didn't conform to your musical values.

But I also don't accept your description that they are cutting corners to make deadline. There are things SF cares about a lot in their libraries and things they obviously care about much less. And they do focus on the things they care a lot about. As is almost certainly the case for all of us. And it seems that my aesthetic values are a good match the SF libraries (and OT's, too). I'm generally fine with their tradeoffs. Yes, that's just me. I'm not trying to make a universal out of my preferences; I'm just defending my preferences.

I still think we are arguing over an aesthetic line, and what you are saying is that SF doesn't care enough about the things that matter a lot to you, and I'm saying I'm ok with their tradeoffs because they are delivering well the things I do value. There's room in that description for things that annoy you to the point a library is all but broken for you, yet I find at most a minor irritation. Similarly, I don't like the tradeoffs of ProjectSam, which create frictions for me, and one of the things I haven't mentioned yet about the PS libraries—and this is probably key—is that the more I used the libraries, the less I liked their sound, so they never inspired me to get over the frictions.


----------



## jamie8 (Sep 25, 2022)

Wow ,i touched a nerve, i hope for Spitfires sake they are listening .


----------



## Mike Fox (Sep 25, 2022)

jbuhler said:


> I still think we are arguing over an aesthetic line, and what you are saying is that SF doesn't care enough about the things that matter a lot to you.


Except that’s never really been the crux of my argument, not really, because it doesn’t matter how either one of us personally _feel_ about the issue. Our feelings are just a byproduct of a situation that actually exists.

Like DJ said, fixing bugs doesn't make more money. New products do.

SA knows this, and they have put themselves in a situation where they must constantly push out libraries in order to maintain their profits and giant status, and because of that, certain aspects will get overlooked, ultimately effecting the overall quality of their libraries.

Not convinced? That’s cool. But I do encourage you to read the countless complaints regarding SA libraries on this forum alone, then take a look at the amount of libraries SA pumps out every year, as well as the amount of YT videos they make, and over top marketing they produce.

The math comes together on its own.


----------



## Taron (Sep 25, 2022)

With Chris Henson taking a break (hopefully not for longer that he'd care for) I sometimes wonder who else at Spitfire is scouring the networks for intel?! 

Honestly, I don't know how it is for others, but I remember Spitfire to be some sort of holy grail of libraries among very few. Never had I expected that they come to somehow feel like a sort of family or friends in a strange way. Still absolutely at some distance, of course, but I really can't help but care for them somehow, like worrying about them, too, when things start to feel a bit like they may be a wee bit off.
Nobody should ever struggle after they have managed to show what they can do. It's totally alright to struggle when you still need to figure out what you do or how to do it. But Spitfire has made it at least twice already, if you asked me, from supplying libraries via Kontakt to launching their own environment. For them I would love to see that they won't have to struggle to get new stuff out in order to make ends meet. May not even be the case, but when I read some of the stuff up here combined with the nagging feeling I have for some time now at the latest after their synth like explorations... I mean, they have the talent, they have access to anyone they'd need to really dominate this market with quality in every way and far less urgency to keep people guessing at their next hyped exploration.

Ah well...and I secretly hope that people get over the concept of holding a note that's being played with all sorts of deranged gymnastics in hopes of creating a fitting atmosphere for some self-important propaganda flick. And instead we make our way back to actual music. And I'd love for more expression possibilities. I mean, listen to any live performance, consider what composers want from musicians in all sections, more nuances for transitions and playing styles, more dynamics, more passion. Not just delicate notes being held until even the cats nod off into eerie nightmares. 
...think it's getting late, hehehe... still fun to think about all that.


----------



## Daniel James (Sep 25, 2022)

ridgero said:


> Do you really think so?
> 
> Spitfire has released a number of major updates including bug fixes in recent years. For example SSO, SCS, BBC SO and HZ Strings.
> 
> Error handling and bug fixing always takes significantly longer than the user can imagine


I know its difficult to do. But that's the point you named a few that have got updates, but how many new products came out during that time. How many of those are waiting for updates? 

And I agree it takes longer than people can imagine to bug fix. All the while they are not making any more money doing it, nor will they make any extra direct money up front for doing so. It would benefit the users but not their wallets. Thats why we get like 20 new string libraries for every 1 that gets a bug fix. Because it takes time and effort to fix bug as you say, but it doesn't make money.


----------



## MarcMahler89 (Sep 25, 2022)

Daniel James said:


> Thats why we get like 20 new string libraries for every 1 that gets a bug fix. Because it takes time and effort to fix bug as you say, but it doesn't make money.


Very true - but this also means that if company A) takes the time & effort to do regular bugfixing/maintenance for their "dated" products, and company B) doesnt, wouldnt you, as a customer, prefer to buy libraries from company A) ?


----------



## Daniel James (Sep 25, 2022)

jamie8 said:


> i hope for Spitfires sake they are listening .


They are not. 😂


----------



## jbuhler (Sep 25, 2022)

Mike Fox said:


> Not convinced? That’s cool. But I do encourage you to read the countless complaints regarding SA libraries on this forum alone, then take a look at the amount of libraries SA pumps out every year, as well as the amount of YT videos they make, and over top marketing they produce.


I mean, I'm on pretty much every one of these threads. I know what people say. I also know my own experience does not generally match those descriptions. I'm not discounting those descriptions. But the forum is not the world, and whatever the complaints here it's only really an issue for SF if they see a downturn in income. 

I agree, as I've said, that SF has to deliver more libraries to cover its costs. I don't agree that this has had a deleterious effect on the quality of their libraries. Indeed, my recent purchases have seemed to have fewer issues than older ones. But the older ones never had a high number of bugs in them, at least in my usage. It does seem to me that updates have become less frequent over the past two or three years, but as I said my sense is that the libraries are in better shape at release than they once were.

If I had to account for why SF libraries receive so many complaints on here, I would say:

First, SF is a very large presence in the market. Lots of folks dislike SF just because they have a large market presence. And you get lots of attention on here by saying "SF is shit." They did have a period when their marketing got out ahead of their libraries (HZ Strings for instance, where the original library was one thing and the ad campaign promised something quite different), and many folks remember that. But I haven't found that recently with their marketing, and I miss in some ways the fun of the grand spectacle of the better run ad campaigns.

Second, many hate that SF is no longer on Kontakt and take aim at SF on the basis of abandoning Kontakt. It doesn't help that the player is less than ideal, and that it occasionally stops working on some systems. I find the player perfectly useable but agree with most that very little about it other than the readability of the GUI improves on the Kontakt libraries. 

Third, SF has a wide range of libraries that appeal outside the standard orchestral package. Many like to make fun of SF's love of flautando for instance, or the way they created a whole field of textural libraries, all of which moves away from the epic aesthetic sensibility that dominates the forum. A similar case can be made about the SF brass, which is not calculated for the over the top superpowered epic sound favored last decade and before but is more in line with the old school controlled symphonic fortissimo. Many of these instruments also have a compensating value of a truly lovely sound in the lower and mid dynamic range. 

Fourth, SF has focused more on the sound of the samples than the line that can be drawn between them.

You can say, I suppose, that SF's aesthetic values and their general mission of supplying libraries for current media scoring to working composers is at odds with the company's need for a large customer base that is drawn not to the niche items but to more general, epically oriented libraries. And I would agree there's a tension there. But I don't think it's insurmountable, and in any case we would need to know much more about who their customers actually are, what they want from sample libraries, and what they are buying. The forum won't really give us that information.


----------



## Daniel James (Sep 25, 2022)

MarcMahler89 said:


> Very true - but this also means that if company A) takes the time & effort to do regular bugfixing/maintenance for their "dated" products, and company B) doesnt, wouldnt you, as a customer, prefer to buy libraries from company A) ?


Thats impossible to answer because libraries are subjective in quality as I say in every video I do. The brass I like some of you hate. So an updated but old brass library to me might be worth using over a brand new one. True Strike and Symphobia comes to mind immediately where the update fixed issues and added new functionality to old samples making them even more useable. and I like those tones and still use them all the time. I still use Cinebrass Pro because I haven't found a brass tone for 12 horns I prefer (with the exception of JXL Brass) so I use both. Cinesamples have updated that a few times to keep it modern, and Orchestral Tools have gone to a whole new engine but there are not bugs in either now that 'bug' me. So I guess I would buy from company A in your example. Go for the sound I want and hope it keeps getting updated. Until something comes along I prefer. I don't tend to buy things for the sake of it. And to be totally honest if Spitfire releases something good and its the best version of the thing I can get I will buy it. But I tend to skip most of their newer releases BECAUSE they are usually released with full blown gonorrhea and never get updates, so I hold off until it becomes better than what I have or I move on.


----------



## Wunderhorn (Sep 25, 2022)

MarcMahler89 said:


> Very true - but this also means that if company A) takes the time & effort to do regular bugfixing/maintenance for their "dated" products, and company B) doesnt, wouldnt you, as a customer, prefer to buy libraries from company A) ?


It's again a numbers game. More influence and bigger marketing gets you more initial sales, even if bridges get burnt afterwards and a number of customers will not become 'regulars'.
It's a marketing decision.

A nice 'company A' example would be AudioBro. Direct communication with customers and things are actually getting done. Just like that there are other smaller companies coming up now who have understood that the relationship to the customer can be something of worth as well.


----------



## MarcMahler89 (Sep 25, 2022)

Daniel James said:


> Thats impossible to answer because libraries are subjective in quality as I say in every video I do. The brass I like some of you hate. So an updated but old brass library to me might be worth using over a brand new one. True Strike and Symphobia comes to mind immediately where the update fixed issues and added new functionality to old samples making them even more useable. and I like those tones and still use them all the time. I still use Cinebrass Pro because I haven't found a brass tone for 12 horns I prefer (with the exception of JXL Brass) so I use both. Cinesamples have updated that a few times to keep it modern, and Orchestral Tools have gone to a whole new engine but there are not bugs in either now that 'bug' me. So I guess I would buy from company A in your example. Go for the sound I want and hope it keeps getting updated. Until something comes along I prefer. I don't tend to buy things for the sake of it. And to be totally honest if Spitfire releases something good and its the best version of the thing I can get I will buy it. But I tend to skip most of their newer releases BECAUSE they are usually released with full blown gonorrhea and never get updates, so I hold off until it becomes better than what I have or I move on.


I actually agree with you - if a certain library sounds better to me than another, even if it got bugs which will never get fixed and it potentially means more work for me, id still choose it. 


Wunderhorn said:


> It's again a numbers game. More influence and bigger marketing gets you more initial sales, even if bridges get burnt afterwards and a number of customers will not become 'regulars'.
> It's a marketing decision.
> 
> A nice 'company A' example would be AudioBro. Direct communication with customers and things are actually getting done. Just like that there are other smaller companies coming up now who have understood that the relationship to the customer can be something of worth as well.


Thats what i actually wanted to edit in my previous post, because that was my second thought on this issue. But in the long run, wouldnt it make more money if a large part of your customerbase hasnt been scared off?


----------



## Mike Fox (Sep 25, 2022)

jbuhler said:


> I mean, I'm on pretty much every one of these threads. I know what people say. I also know my own experience does not generally match those descriptions. I'm not discounting those descriptions. But the forum is not the world, and whatever the complaints here it's only really an issue for SF if they see a downturn in income.
> 
> I agree, as I've said, that SF has to deliver more libraries to cover its costs. I don't agree that this has had a deleterious effect on the quality of their libraries. Indeed, my recent purchases have seemed to have fewer issues than older ones. But the older ones never had a high number of bugs in them, at least in my usage. It does seem to me that updates have become less frequent over the past two or three years, but as I said my sense is that the libraries are in better shape at release than they once were.
> 
> ...


Most of the complaints on this forum regarding SA seem to be about bugs needing to be fixed. That’s information that i think actually can be used, especially since these are valid and specific complaints.

Of course you have complaints about the player and the marketing, but the marketing rarely (if ever) lives up to the hype, and perhaps If SA spent more time on fixing bugs, rather than focusing so much on marketing, I’m willing to bet you wouldn’t be seeing the amount of backlash that occurs.

But that’s kind of my point. SA has their own priorities with constant new releases and extravagant marketing being at the top of the list. Everything else takes a back seat, including quality control.

But we can agree to disagree. It’s all good.


----------



## Trash Panda (Sep 25, 2022)

Taron said:


> Never had I expected that they come to somehow feel like a sort of family or friends in a strange way. Still absolutely at some distance, of course, but I really can't help but care for them somehow, like worrying about them, too, when things start to feel a bit like they may be a wee bit off.


The power of branding at work.


----------



## Taron (Sep 25, 2022)

Trash Panda said:


> The power of branding at work.


Absolutely big part of it. But it's the mixture out of a long time familiarity with their products and eventually getting almost in touch with them via BBCSO Discover and how much I've enjoyed experimenting with it to having Core, which already feels like an "instrument" I had for years, like a family piano or traveling guitar I'd always have with me. It's such an important part of my joy to explore composing orchestral music, while I haven't even done that much with it, yet. I just know.

I'd love to know their other stuff, but while I'm hoping to one day be able to allow myself the indulgence, I'm listening to what people say and what they do with it... and it is surly curbing anyone's enthusiasm. The entitled bitterness, the tantrums, the delusions of grandeur and self-importance, well, a whole bunch of words you could put a "self-" in front of, hahaha. But it only shows how many of us still so dearly embrace the inner child. Maybe I'm saved from all this because I no longer have the money to throw at things I couldn't afford only to complain about how they don't serve my every need.

Anyway, it's all interesting and enlightening in various ways. People are greedy on either side. The nature of selling and buying is equally ugly and can borderline psychopathy by its very nature. There are still enough folks, I hope, who understand the nature of energy exchange as long as we all have to pay for each other's energy.
A big wish of mine is for all of us to realize that some of us just enjoy the strive for its own sake for it is so wonderfully easy to be pissed off at something that suggest disdain to be justified and then feel important for it, too. Pfffff... everyone is important, always!


----------



## Mike Fox (Sep 25, 2022)

Trash Panda said:


> The power of branding at work.


100%

There’s a reason some big name composers will come around here when they have a new release, only to vanish after the intro price ends.

Making people feel like you’re their friend is probably one of the best ways to sell a product.


----------



## Baronvonheadless (Sep 25, 2022)

I still purchase from them, but I still have a bad taste that the abbey road 2 bugs haven’t been fixed BECAUSE it’s a huge bug in the legato. On a few of the select mics. On the portamento! 

Which are the features that require you to spend all that extra money on in the first place. If you can’t even use the extra mics on portamento what was the purpose of buying pro and not core? 

Seems like they would have tried to rectify that at least.


----------



## jbuhler (Sep 25, 2022)

Trash Panda said:


> The power of branding at work.


The brands aren’t completely imaginary projections. The libraries of different companies are as different as say the Chicago Symphony is from the Vienna Phil. The companies have different aesthetic priorities that affect the whole product line. Heavyocity strings sound nothing like SF strings, and there is even a rather pronounced difference between OT strings and SF strings, even though they are quite a lot closer. VSL strings sound different still and generally more like each other than say chamber strings from different companies do. 

The transfer of composer names to libraries is an interesting addition. This often feels like projection. You can be Hans Zimmer if you only buy these libraries that bear his name. Here too I would say it’s not just projection. The various Zimmer libraries do have a commonality, though it feels vaguer than say the SF sound. The Arnalds libraries have a bit more I of a distinct sound. And even libraries for specific shows like the Bleeding Fingers libraries SF has done or something like Modus by OT often seem less connected to the scores of the shows than I would have expected. This makes them more generally useful but the utility of the branding is surprisingly diffuse.


----------



## Instrugramm (Sep 25, 2022)

Spitfire are awesome, I love their products and tone, I own a ton of their stuff and will buy a Spitfire product if it fits my needs. High praise indeed for the people who work there as well as the founders!

That being said, I hate their player with a passion (unintuitive, takes up a lot of cpu+ram, no purge funtionnality), it's easily the worst of all the players I have to put up with. Secondly a lot of their samples are out of tune and the round robins are all over the place, writing with shorts is often a pain to work with. They have definitely improved on these issues but it happens too often nonetheless and not being able to use something (Kepler and Heirloom are borderline offensive in these regards) you bought for quite some money can be frustrating as hell.

I really wish they'd improve in that area as I want them to do well and I want them to stay creative. Not all of these criticisms are supposed to be a bashing but rather the offer of a reaching hand in hope of a bright future for the company and their community.


----------



## Virtuoso (Sep 25, 2022)

Daniel James said:


> gonorrhea


Was that Albion VII?


----------



## Daniel James (Sep 25, 2022)

Virtuoso said:


> Was that Albion VII?


Take your pick really.


----------



## Henrik B. Jensen (Sep 26, 2022)

Why not just add 8 dials so you can choose the starting point of each RR of a patch yourself - if you’re not happy with the default choice.

It’s not rocket science.


----------



## blaggins (Sep 26, 2022)

Taron said:


> If Spitfire manages to have their one player for all current and future libraries in a way that they may update the player without troubles, it probably is quite doable to have years of new sample content creation as priority and then months of updating. Seems like this could well be sustainable.


I'd agree with you except they are doing the opposite. And that is exactly the issue, they are not managing to have the same player for any library. They release a totally separate player for every single one. Sure they look and feel the same, but there are sometime (often almost insignificant, though occasionally significant - see Fractured Strings scale selection) feature differences. In the backend they are almost certainly copy/pasting huge amounts of their own code and building a new player each time, probably making a few tweaks here and here. This is an awful strategy from a software maintainability perspective...

Maybe I'm wrong and they are *not* copy/pasting code, maybe they actually have a sophisticated feature-toggling configuration system where all the nuances between players are captured in a modular way and enabled at build time, but they actually share a consistent codebase underneath the covers. I kinda doubt it though as those kinds of complex build environments are pretty tough to design and maintain. Ask yourself this: why would each Originals be a separate player instead of one Originals player that can play any of their Originals content? I can't think of any good reason other than they made a huge mistake when designing their patch selection and browsing features within their own player and can't figure a way out of it... Why would AROOF and BBCSO need a separate player? Why not just a way to skin the the thing so it has the right logo in the background?


----------



## Bluemount Score (Sep 26, 2022)

AMBi said:


> doesn’t need its own thread


6 pages later...


----------



## Taron (Sep 26, 2022)

blaggins said:


> I'd agree with you except they are doing the opposite. And that is exactly the issue, they are not managing to have the same player for any library. They release a totally separate player for every single one. Sure they look and feel the same, but there are sometime (often almost insignificant, though occasionally significant - see Fractured Strings scale selection) feature differences. In the backend they are almost certainly copy/pasting huge amounts of their own code and building a new player each time, probably making a few tweaks here and here. This is an awful strategy from a software maintainability perspective...
> 
> Maybe I'm wrong and they are *not* copy/pasting code, maybe they actually have a sophisticated feature-toggling configuration system where all the nuances between players are captured in a modular way and enabled at build time, but they actually share a consistent codebase underneath the covers. I kinda doubt it though as those kinds of complex build environments are pretty tough to design and maintain. Ask yourself this: why would each Originals be a separate player instead of one Originals player that can play any of their Originals content? I can't think of any good reason other than they made a huge mistake when designing their patch selection and browsing features within their own player and can't figure a way out of it... Why would AROOF and BBCSO need a separate player? Why not just a way to skin the the thing so it has the right logo in the background?


Yeah, that all goes into the "novelty issues" folder, I imagine. One of these days they will likely want to revise their approach a bit to make it easier on them. This stuff I literally would just give some time.


----------



## Trash Panda (Sep 26, 2022)

Taron said:


> Absolutely big part of it. But it's the mixture out of a long time familiarity with their products and eventually getting almost in touch with them via BBCSO Discover and how much I've enjoyed experimenting with it to having Core, which already feels like an "instrument" I had for years, like a family piano or traveling guitar I'd always have with me. It's such an important part of my joy to explore composing orchestral music, while I haven't even done that much with it, yet. I just know.


Yes, there is typically some level of merit in a product that has strong branding. You can't really build a strong brand without it. On the flip side, there are _very_ strong products that have don't have the same strength built into their branding. Whether it's an intentional decision to keep the focus on the product itself versus the brand, a lack of marketing experts to help build the brand's stickiness, or in some cases _trying and failing_ to build that level of brand strength. 

Despite whatever gripes anyone has about Spitfire's products, no one can deny they have done an excellent job at building strength in the brand itself. Anyone in marketing who's job it is to build the brand would kill to have customers think of their brand as family. That's basically the end game goal of brand marketing.



jbuhler said:


> The brands aren’t completely imaginary projections. The libraries of different companies are as different as say the Chicago Symphony is from the Vienna Phil. The companies have different aesthetic priorities that affect the whole product line. Heavyocity strings sound nothing like SF strings, and there is even a rather pronounced difference between OT strings and SF strings, even though they are quite a lot closer. VSL strings sound different still and generally more like each other than say chamber strings from different companies do.
> 
> The transfer of composer names to libraries is an interesting addition. This often feels like projection. You can be Hans Zimmer if you only buy these libraries that bear his name. Here too I would say it’s not just projection. The various Zimmer libraries do have a commonality, though it feels vaguer than say the SF sound. The Arnalds libraries have a bit more I of a distinct sound. And even libraries for specific shows like the Bleeding Fingers libraries SF has done or something like Modus by OT often seem less connected to the scores of the shows than I would have expected. This makes them more generally useful but the utility of the branding is surprisingly diffuse.


I'm speaking to brand marketing. Building up the allure and strength of the Spitfire brand name. Sure there is benefit in cross-brand collaboration, but having names like Hans Zimmer or Olafur Arnald associated to your brand in the case of Spitfire is the icing, while their brand strength is the cake that icing sits upon.

As mentioned above, there has to be some value in the product or it is impossible to build a strong brand. But making customers feel like your brand is indispensable, or the holy grail mentioned above in being "like family", is not something every product does and what most brands never achieve.

From a product perspective, the Spitfire libraries I have used typically have top-tier sonority, but on the scripting, quality control and flexibility side, they feel like the same level as 8dio's offerings. If they could improve their scripting, QC and flexibility to the level of Impact Soundworks or Cinematic Studio Series, I would sing a very different tune.


----------



## Mike Fox (Sep 26, 2022)

Trash Panda said:


> From a product perspective, the Spitfire libraries I have used typically have top-tier sonority, but on the scripting, quality control and flexibility side, they feel like the same level as 8dio's offerings. If they could improve their scripting, QC and flexibility to the level of Impact Soundworks or Cinematic Studio Series, I would sing a very different tune.


This is basically where I’m coming from as well.

As much as I love the sound of some SA libraries (Solstice has recently become a go-to), there’s absolutely nothing praiseworthy about their scripting, playability, QC, etc. It’s all very mediocre stuff, and sometimes even subpar.

I would love nothing more than for SA to take a step back, and take some notes from cutting edge developers, like AI or Alex Walbank who excel at making REALLY clean libraries. 

Unfortunately, I really don’t think SA is even remotely interested in improving their obvious downfalls. I’m sure they’ll continue to keep fixing bugs, but probably only at snail pace speeds. 

Gotta keep that marketing train rolling, and the SA factory pumping.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic (Sep 26, 2022)

Now's your chance to ask them to record without bugs. Might need to get AR Studio One fumigated though.


----------



## Wunderhorn (Sep 26, 2022)

Trash Panda said:


> ...but on the scripting, quality control and flexibility side, they feel like the same level as 8dio's offerings.


Actually, IMO I think that 8Dio's latest standard instrument GUI is even ahead of anything Spitfire does. Slots to assign your own multi for keyswitching? Plus it is pretty straight-forward and no-nonsense, easy to grasp and it works pretty well in my experience on a multitude of instruments.


----------



## Pablocrespo (Sep 27, 2022)

Wunderhorn said:


> Actually, IMO I think that 8Dio's latest standard instrument GUI is even ahead of anything Spitfire does. Slots to assign your own multi for keyswitching? Plus it is pretty straight-forward and no-nonsense, easy to grasp and it works pretty well in my experience on a multitude of instruments.


8dio is pretty much the same, quality control is, I would venture, non existant. 

I have deleted whole libraries because of their inconsistencies in the sampling and editing. The ones that remained, I have to render them to audio and heavy edit them to be usable. (Same thing happens to OT choir syllables for example)


----------



## jbuhler (Sep 27, 2022)

Pablocrespo said:


> 8dio is pretty much the same, quality control is, I would venture, non existant.
> 
> I have deleted whole libraries because of their inconsistencies in the sampling and editing. The ones that remained, I have to render them to audio and heavy edit them to be usable. (Same thing happens to OT choir syllables for example)


Yeah, consistency is way worse with 8dio instruments compared to SF and generally out of the box they seem set up for a different kind of music from what I write. 

As far as I’m aware the instruments are all unlocked though, so you can remake them to your own specifications within what the samples allow. Adachi is a great example of what can be done with the underlying 8dio samples. So if you learn Kontakt scripting and you have the patience, 8dio has some great content to which you can apply your scripting and create instruments made to order.


----------



## Wunderhorn (Sep 27, 2022)

Pablocrespo said:


> 8dio is pretty much the same, quality control is, I would venture, non existant.
> 
> I have deleted whole libraries because of their inconsistencies in the sampling and editing. The ones that remained, I have to render them to audio and heavy edit them to be usable. (Same thing happens to OT choir syllables for example)


My response was to the GUI, which I find in case of 8Dio is more user friendly. Quality control is a whole different thing which has been discussed in other respective 8Dio threads.


----------



## jbuhler (Sep 27, 2022)

Wunderhorn said:


> My response was to the GUI, which I find in case of 8Dio is more user friendly. Quality control is a whole different thing which has been discussed in other respective 8Dio threads.


The ability to assign articulations to slots is nice but the slots are limited. I rather prefer the SF UACC functionality for this as it makes assigning large numbers of articulations to the same track and midi channel very straightforward. Then articulation sets can do the actual selecting of the articulation. My recollection is you have to use midi channels to get the full array of articulations for many 8dio instruments loaded into a single track. And midi channels then require propagating CCs across the channels. At least that’s the case in Logic.


----------



## Rudianos (Sep 27, 2022)

One thing too I like with SINE and Synchron, Kontakt ... I can casually open them for jamming... dont have to deal with the extra screens of a DAW. Spitfire seems like they are the only major dev to require a DAW? I know it is just a quirk, a feeling ... but there is some power in just opening 1 library and spending time with it - with no other distractions.


----------



## jbuhler (Sep 27, 2022)

Rudianos said:


> One thing too I like with SINE and Synchron, Kontakt ... I can casually open them for jamming... dont have to deal with the extra screens of a DAW. Spitfire seems like they are the only major dev to require a DAW? I know it is just a quirk, a feeling ... but there is some power in just opening 1 library and spending time with it - with no other distractions.


I agree completely! It's one of the things I use Unify for: loading instruments like the SF Player that don't have stand alone apps.


----------



## nowimhere (Nov 10, 2022)

So... What y'all are saying is... I shouldn't buy AR-2 ?
That would be a real shame. I'm just looking for another solo string quartet.
Already have xsamples contemporary one, which I do like. But looking for 
something else. 
I was going to wait until black Friday here to get AR-2 , but now I've come across this
thread and am hesitant.


----------



## Mike Fox (Nov 10, 2022)

nowimhere said:


> So... What y'all are saying is... I shouldn't buy AR-2 ?
> That would be a real shame. I'm just looking for another solo string quartet.
> Already have xsamples contemporary one, which I do like. But looking for
> something else.
> ...


The only thing I can say about Spitfire libraries is to buy them for the tone, and not the programming/playability, or quality control. They’ve been consistently behind in the race compared to many other developers in this regard.

Also, be prepared for possible issues with their player. Some people have no issues, while others, like myself, have enough issues to avoid any SA player library.


----------



## Rudianos (Nov 10, 2022)

nowimhere said:


> So... What y'all are saying is... I shouldn't buy AR-2 ?
> That would be a real shame. I'm just looking for another solo string quartet.
> Already have xsamples contemporary one, which I do like. But looking for
> something else.
> ...


Gorgeous sound nimble. 3 mics broken, long load times. Gorgeous though I am happy to have


----------



## blaggins (Nov 10, 2022)

Taron said:


> Yeah, that all goes into the "novelty issues" folder, I imagine. One of these days they will likely want to revise their approach a bit to make it easier on them. This stuff I literally would just give some time.


I salute your optimism! In fact I wish I could share it, but the fact that they have again released a dedicated player for their latest library, with no mention of back porting new features into the older players, and interestingly no mention of whether or not the upcoming ARO libraries will even live in the same player or in totally independent ones (like with every release since their player got introduced)... well none of that makes me optimistic.

I am wondering if they can even complete their ARO line without a major overhaul. If a Taiko patch takes up 1.5GB of RAM, how much RAM is a full orchestral template going to take? 256GB?


----------



## cqd (Nov 10, 2022)

blaggins said:


> I salute your optimism! In fact I wish I could share it, but the fact that they have again released a dedicated player for their latest library, with no mention of back porting new features into the older players, and interestingly no mention of whether or not the upcoming ARO libraries will even live in the same player or in totally independent ones (like with every release since their player got introduced)... well none of that makes me optimistic.
> 
> I am wondering if they can even complete their ARO line without a major overhaul. If a Taiko patch takes up 1.5GB of RAM, how much RAM is a full orchestral template going to take? 256GB?


That's what amazes me..Surely it's pretty much the same player..refinements and fixes, sorting bugs etc should be rolled out to all of them pretty much when found..it should be a lot more streamlined and stable now than it was when HZ strings came out..


----------



## Henrik B. Jensen (Nov 11, 2022)

blaggins said:


> I am wondering if they can even complete their ARO line without a major overhaul. If a Taiko patch takes up 1.5GB of RAM, how much RAM is a full orchestral template going to take? 256GB?


Not to mention the extremely slow sample loading times compared to Kontakt.

I think Spitfire will be forced to optimize their player.


----------



## Aitcpiano (Nov 11, 2022)

cqd said:


> That's what amazes me..Surely it's pretty much the same player..refinements and fixes, sorting bugs etc should be rolled out to all of them pretty much when found..it should be a lot more streamlined and stable now than it was when HZ strings came out..


This is what confuses me. Seems like the new ARO Low percussion has mute and solo buttons for each mic channel. But no updates for the player to include this feature for all their previously released libraries in their player.


----------



## shropshirelad (Nov 11, 2022)

Henrik B. Jensen said:


> Not to mention the extremely slow sample loading times compared to Kontakt.
> 
> I think Spitfire will be forced to optimize their player.


This post prompted me to fire up AR2 just to satisfy myself that it's as bad as I thought it was. It is. Took around 6 mins to load the initial Ensemble: All in One from SSD.


----------



## Henrik B. Jensen (Nov 11, 2022)

shropshirelad said:


> This post prompted me to fire up AR2 just to satisfy myself that it's as bad as I thought it was. It is. Took around 6 mins to load the initial Ensemble: All in One from SSD.


I made a test once with loading times of a 12 GB template in BBCSO Pro vs. a Kontakt template with the same amount of RAM used. The difference in loading speed was so big, it was depressing.


----------



## Greeno (Nov 11, 2022)

nowimhere said:


> So... What y'all are saying is... I shouldn't buy AR-2 ?
> That would be a real shame. I'm just looking for another solo string quartet.
> Already have xsamples contemporary one, which I do like. But looking for
> something else.
> ...


Embertone has a bunch of solo instruments you could make a quartet out of, they'll have a sale sometime this winter.
NI has the Cremona Quartet on sale now
8dio has intimate strings now on sale ( possibly not a quartet I think) but they do have the quintet recently released.


----------



## AndrewS (Nov 11, 2022)

Greeno said:


> NI has the Cremona Quartet on sale now


The Cremona Quartet was a nice surprise with how playable and intuitive it is to use. Definitely worth a pickup.


----------



## carlc (Nov 11, 2022)

nowimhere said:


> So... What y'all are saying is... I shouldn't buy AR-2 ?
> That would be a real shame. I'm just looking for another solo string quartet.
> Already have xsamples contemporary one, which I do like. But looking for
> something else.
> ...


I would suggest looking at Intimate Studio Strings from 8Dio. With the current flash sale, you can grab it for $45 which is a fantastic price. That library also has a few quirks, but nothing like the AR2 challenges I’m seeing in comments here. 

Intimate Studio Strings is more suited for pop and non-orchestral music (like AR2). It is extremely dry (unlike AR2) so you need to add your own reverb. My plan is to make due with this until sometime down the road (hopefully) there is an update plus a good sale on AR2.


----------



## Mike Stone (Nov 11, 2022)

shropshirelad said:


> This post prompted me to fire up AR2 just to satisfy myself that it's as bad as I thought it was. It is. Took around 6 mins to load the initial Ensemble: All in One from SSD.


That's nuts. Did you use "optimize" in the Spitfire app?

Still waiting for that update/patch, if you're listening Spitfire...


----------



## Mike Fox (Nov 11, 2022)

shropshirelad said:


> This post prompted me to fire up AR2 just to satisfy myself that it's as bad as I thought it was. It is. Took around 6 mins to load the initial Ensemble: All in One from SSD.


----------



## nowimhere (Nov 11, 2022)

carlc said:


> I would suggest looking at Intimate Studio Strings from 8Dio. With the current flash sale, you can grab it for $45 which is a fantastic price. That library also has a few quirks, but nothing like the AR2 challenges I’m seeing in comments here.
> 
> Intimate Studio Strings is more suited for pop and non-orchestral music (like AR2). It is extremely dry (unlike AR2) so you need to add your own reverb. My plan is to make due with this until sometime down the road (hopefully) there is an update plus a good sale on AR2.


Have it.


Greeno said:


> Embertone has a bunch of solo instruments you could make a quartet out of, they'll have a sale sometime this winter.
> NI has the Cremona Quartet on sale now
> 8dio has intimate strings now on sale ( possibly not a quartet I think) but they do have the quintet recently released.


I do have Cremona and Intimate strings.
Cremona is very... "Treblely" - It doesn't have that warm of a sound.
Intimate strings is also not quite what I'm looking for.

I might go with Embertone. But I also might go with SWAM and CSSS.
Looking for a good classical bed/base
Also looking for something fun and playable (SWAM might hit that as well as the bohemian cello)



> shropshirelad said:
> This post prompted me to fire up AR2 just to satisfy myself that it's as bad as I thought it was. It is. Took around 6 mins to load the initial Ensemble: All in One from SSD.


Thats almost as bad as 8d load times lol


----------



## zeng (Nov 11, 2022)

shropshirelad said:


> This post prompted me to fire up AR2 just to satisfy myself that it's as bad as I thought it was. It is. Took around 6 mins to load the initial Ensemble: All in One from SSD.


This is about 1 min for me


----------



## nowimhere (Nov 11, 2022)

zeng said:


> This is about 1 min for me


Has to be the difference in Towers then. 
I'm using a custom PC audio labs tower, so I feel perhaps I will not have the load issues. 
Curious @zeng . Do you like the lib? Do you think it has as many bugs as everyone here claims?


----------



## shropshirelad (Nov 11, 2022)

Mike Stone said:


> That's nuts. Did you use "optimize" in the Spitfire app?
> 
> Still waiting for that update/patch, if you're listening Spitfire...


Hadn't optimised since setting up new Mac, had stopped using as so slow on old machine. Now optimised and a lot quicker to load. Thanks for the reminder, now working though other libs.


----------



## babylonwaves (Nov 11, 2022)

shropshirelad said:


> This post prompted me to fire up AR2 just to satisfy myself that it's as bad as I thought it was. It is. Took around 6 mins to load the initial Ensemble: All in One from SSD.


@shropshirelad 
16sec here. From one cheap SSD on a Mac in Logic.


----------



## Rudianos (Nov 11, 2022)

babylonwaves said:


> @shropshirelad
> 16sec here. From one cheap SSD on a Mac in Logic.


16 secs for me too on NVME - 46 seconds for all 5 instruments


----------



## zeng (Nov 11, 2022)

nowimhere said:


> Has to be the difference in Towers then.
> I'm using a custom PC audio labs tower, so I feel perhaps I will not have the load issues.
> Curious @zeng . Do you like the lib? Do you think it has as many bugs as everyone here claims?


Well I didn't have any problems with the library so far...I love the sound quality and the "flautando" articulation (it is enough for me to have this library). No bugs but it is a little bit problematic to load more than 3 mics. When you load 3-4 mics and play staccato with both hands, it starts to click-pop because of high amount of midi notes. Other than that I am happy with it. Btw I put the library on NVMe M2 SSD which is very fast to load patches (40-50 secs for whole ensemble).


----------



## Mike Stone (Nov 11, 2022)

The patch loading for AR-2 is slower than any other library I have (after being optimized), and the ensemble mode clicks and pops at buffer size=1024 using a maxed-out 2018 Mac Mini. So these are real issues, but the transitions and legato issues are more annoying to me.


----------

