# Native Instruments: Emotive Strings



## Marius Masalar (Feb 19, 2015)

Look what we have here:

http://www.native-instruments.com/en/pr ... e-strings/

http://youtu.be/ZNcDoKY1xjM
http://youtu.be/V8cO5PzL5uU

Seems like the expressive/legato companion to Action Strings, since it's still phrase-based, but that second demo shows it sounding reasonably flexible.


----------



## benmrx (Feb 19, 2015)

Woah. Wasn't expecting that....., and then I wasn't expecting to like it! Nice job NI!


----------



## Guy Rowland (Feb 19, 2015)

Very hard to know what to make of it from their info, needs a proper walkthrough. I'd be surprised if I was interested though. Making legato lines out of bits doesn't sound anything like as appealing as just playing them.


----------



## benmrx (Feb 19, 2015)

Guy Rowland @ Thu Feb 19 said:


> Very hard to know what to make of it from their info, needs a proper walkthrough. I'd be surprised if I was interested though. Making legato lines out of bits doesn't sound anything like as appealing as just playing them.



Yeah, definitely want more info. To me this is coming across as something more similar to the 'runs builder' in orchestral tools and less of a tool for sweeping lyrical lines. The video showing the arpeggios was pretty nice!


----------



## Christof (Feb 19, 2015)

If it sounds as crappy as Action Strings I won't buy it.
We need undressed demos, not full arrangements.


----------



## Lawson. (Feb 19, 2015)

If this is what it seems like (another "Action Strings"- type library), then I'm not a fan.

[begin rant]

I have a pet peeve about these types of libraries. These are basically construction-kit/loop libraries where you don't need to know anything about orchestration, strings, and complex composing. All you need is to play a few notes and BOOM! Magic! Someone who knows very little about the subject can sound great in a very short time.

For people who want to add a bit of strings to their genre (house, rap, whatever) I can sort of understand it, but using libraries like this and trying to pass as a "real" composer just pisses me off. If you write for pre-recorded loops, maybe composing isn't your thing.

The worst part is, most people can't tell a difference, and will think the loops these so-called "composers" threw together are brilliant. On the plus side, eventually you start hearing the same loops everywhere (ahem Damage) and people tire of it. Then, when someone wants something knew, the "composer" will be totally stuck.

Let me add that I'm sure there are legit composers who use these types of libraries in a pinch to quickly get the cue done. This rant isn't aimed at them; they know their stuff, and need breaks some times.

[rant over]


----------



## playz123 (Feb 19, 2015)

Christof @ Thu Feb 19 said:


> If it sounds as crappy as Action Strings I won't buy it.
> We need undressed demos, not full arrangements.



I have to agree with this. I was never impressed with the sound of Action Strings, and also as Guy alluded to, I really don't feel these types of libraries are for me, simply because I'd rather play in what I want, rather than work with phrases. To be fair, this may ideal for some, so no disrespect to NI's new product and also I understand what they are getting at when they talk about Expression. But with the great string libraries we have these days, while we may not be able to exactly match the expression captured in 'phrases', I believe we are often getting really close. So close in fact that in some instances it's getting very hard to say for certain if it's "real or if it's Memorex".  I guess you have to have been around for a few years to remember that phrase or what it was about.


----------



## Christof (Feb 19, 2015)

Actually this is the same team that did Action Strings.
The problem is also what would you do with a midi arrangement if you want to pass it over to an orchestrator???
He would have to transcribe all this prerecorded patterns, this costs time and money.

I just came back from a recording session for a music library, we recorded about 25 pieces by different composers.
Some did a very good job with notation and score preparation, but many did an awful job.
They had absolutely no idea how to notate and how a cello works.
This may be also because of these phrase libraries.

I hate them more and more.


----------



## benmrx (Feb 19, 2015)

Honest question to people that 'hate' these kinds of libraries. How do you feel about something like the new Spitfire Evo Grid? Even in the video he jokes about taking a 'working lunch' where he simply holds a Cmin + sustain pedal and has a sandwich. 

I mean, you don't see any of these comments in the Evo thread....., but isn't that also a product made up of 'phrases' where you don't have to worry as much about proper orchestration as much? It's just a different 'kind' of phrase isnt it? I mean.... I would have no clue how to properly orchestrate those Evos. Should I not be using them?


----------



## Christof (Feb 19, 2015)

I haven't heard of Evo yet, so I can't say anything so far.But this seems to go into sounddesign directions, same as Omnisphere and those kind of things.
You can't orchestrate them.
I just don't like these classical phrase libraries.
Everyone who likes it should use it.


----------



## Lawson. (Feb 19, 2015)

benmrx @ Thu Feb 19 said:


> Honest question to people that 'hate' these kinds of libraries. How do you feel about something like the new Spitfire Evo Grid? Even in the video he jokes about taking a 'working lunch' where he simply holds a Cmin + sustain pedal and has a sandwich.
> 
> I mean, you don't see any of these comments in the Evo thread....., but isn't that also a product made up of 'phrases' where you don't have to worry as much about proper orchestration as much? It's just a different 'kind' of phrase isnt it? I mean.... I would have no clue how to properly orchestrate those Evos. Should I not be using them?



That's an avant garde sound-design library. You don't generally compose and orchestrate sound-design. It's like an evolving synth. 

Granted, to orchestrate Evo, you'd probably have to give the musicians directions on what you wanted the sound to be like, which would require orchestration knowledge. For example, "low (anywhere IV) sul tasto for 6 measures gradually turning into a high (anywhere I) tremolo sul pont for 3 measures".


----------



## benmrx (Feb 19, 2015)

Lawson. @ Thu Feb 19 said:


> benmrx @ Thu Feb 19 said:
> 
> 
> > Honest question to people that 'hate' these kinds of libraries. How do you feel about something like the new Spitfire Evo Grid? Even in the video he jokes about taking a 'working lunch' where he simply holds a Cmin + sustain pedal and has a sandwich.
> ...



True. I guess my main question is in regards to using libraries with phrases. IMO, this new NI library and SF Evo are both phrase based...., just different kinds of phrases. It just seems like some 'get a pass' from the community and some get slammed right out of the gate. I would also argue that there're plenty of cues that are more geared towards evolving textures and less on a melodic or even tempo driven structure.


----------



## Lawson. (Feb 19, 2015)

benmrx @ Thu Feb 19 said:


> True. I guess my main question is in regards to using libraries with phrases. IMO, this new NI library and SF Evo are both phrase based...., just different kinds of phrases. It just seems like some 'get a pass' from the community and some get slammed right out of the gate.



I guess it depends on what's currently possible to do with standard, deep-sampled instrument libraries. If you can currently do it from scratch, why have the easy way out? If it's something that isn't really possible to do with traditional chromatic sampling, it's currently the best option we have so we take it. At least Evo makes it possible to get unique and custom blends, whereas Emotive Strings and such is always the same.


----------



## germancomponist (Feb 19, 2015)

Christof @ Thu Feb 19 said:


> I hate them more and more.



Hi hi  

And you all can see/read it: Today it was not me who said it! o/~ 

o-[][]-o


----------



## benmrx (Feb 19, 2015)

But what if you can't do it from scratch....., not because you don't know how but because it would take multiple libraries you don't have to match the realism/quality and in the end take longer and cost more money. Same with EVO..., I mean you could spend the time and crossfades between multiple articulations and libraries to get a similar effect....., but EVO would be quicker, cheaper and quite possibly sound better.


----------



## AC986 (Feb 19, 2015)

germancomponist @ Thu Feb 19 said:


> Christof @ Thu Feb 19 said:
> 
> 
> > I hate them more and more.
> ...



Go and get in your Tiger tank out Gunther and attack them!

Actually, tbh there are quite a few libraries out there that have these phrases. I have Minimal for example. But what I noticed from the small videos that are already up, is the sound of this one. Doesn't sound very good to me.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Feb 19, 2015)

benmrx @ Thu Feb 19 said:


> But what if you can't do it from scratch....., not because you don't know how but because it would take multiple libraries you don't have to match the realism/quality and in the end take longer and cost more money. Same with EVO..., I mean you could spend the time and crossfades between multiple articulations and libraries to get a similar effect....., but EVO would be quicker, cheaper and quite possibly sound better.



But that's what I don't really get with Emotive Strings. Fx - yes; strange and esoteric - yes. Action strings was pretty marginal to be honest - doesn't sound any more realistic (and is less flexible) than LASS' ART, save for a few patterns with glisses. But legato lines? Don't we have legato patches for that? Does it really sound way more realistic?

There's a little 20s video on their site which shows how you'd play the phrases. Fine, except they all need to be joined together... whereupon their whole selling point vanishes up their sleeve. And that's a problem playable legato doesn't suffer from - you can join anything you like + / - an octave.

I don't think Action Strings is the work of the devil, it's just pretty uninspired and not very useful in practice. My early sense is that will be even more the case here.


----------



## Vision (Feb 19, 2015)

Did you all notice that in the videos, the actual notes are shown as being played within kontakt? But the midi events are showing as loops. Did I miss something? 

Edit: not all, but in regards to the arpeggio video.


----------



## mk282 (Feb 19, 2015)

It's pretty obvious this is for tight deadlines. Not a detailed notation to be passed on to the orchestrator.

All you haters are barking up the wrong tree.


----------



## José Herring (Feb 19, 2015)

Well I hate all phrase libraries by nature. But this one seems to be mostly focused on those scoring accompaniment patterns that are kind of the bread and butter of cinema scoring but that have fallen out of favor due to the fact that it's almost impossible to do these kinds of things with samples.

As for passing it along to an orchestrator all you would need to do is put the pattern into midi. It would be nice if the notation files were included. But should be easy enough to do it yourself.


----------



## benmrx (Feb 19, 2015)

Guy Rowland @ Thu Feb 19 said:


> benmrx @ Thu Feb 19 said:
> 
> 
> > But what if you can't do it from scratch....., not because you don't know how but because it would take multiple libraries you don't have to match the realism/quality and in the end take longer and cost more money. Same with EVO..., I mean you could spend the time and crossfades between multiple articulations and libraries to get a similar effect....., but EVO would be quicker, cheaper and quite possibly sound better.
> ...



First off, I'll agree on the notion that Action Strings missed the mark, but that doesn't mean I'm going to automatically throw this one out too. That said, I fully agree.... to an extent that something like LASS would be WAY more flexible. However, there's a HUGE price difference, and that was part of my point. This is $300, LASS is $1K. If you don't _already have_ a string library that can do faster arpeggios without falling apart than this could be a great fit. That remains to be seen.... er... heard though until further reviews and non NI demos come out. I guess I'm also honing my argument here more towards the apparent option of using this new library for faster arpeggios and ostinatos, and less so for thematic, melodic legato lines.


----------



## Saxer (Feb 19, 2015)

the problem with pattern loops is that it only creates pattern music. beautiful to make emotional moments for a few seconds but it doesn't evolve. if you have no control over the dynamic you have nothing.


----------



## Vision (Feb 19, 2015)

mk282 @ Thu Feb 19 said:


> It's pretty obvious this is for tight deadlines. Not a detailed notation to be passed on to the orchestrator.
> 
> All you haters are barking up the wrong tree.



I see it as a tool also, but I can understand some of the frustration here. I take pride in playing, and programming my own lines, but I can see a use for this as a supplement to original material. More so, the arpeggio phrases. 

Which libraries are close to pulling off convincing.. clean, mid tempo, to fast arpeggios like this one? I have orchestral string runs.. and decommissioned HS which has a decent slurred fast legato patch. I'm sure I could mix and match libs to get some great results. I just don't have the patience to try this right now..  

Can someone do a test to emulate the arpeggios shown in the ES demos with regular libraries? Would be interested in the results. 

I recall guys like Saxer doing some great stuff with Dimension strings.


----------



## Vision (Feb 19, 2015)

Saxer @ Thu Feb 19 said:


> the problem with pattern loops is that it only creates pattern music. beautiful to make emotional moments for a few seconds but it doesn't evolve. if you have no control over the dynamic you have nothing.



lol how ironic.. didn't know you even posted when I mentioned you.


----------



## Marius Masalar (Feb 19, 2015)

Saxer @ Thu Feb 19 said:


> ...if you have no control over the dynamic you have nothing.


For the record, you appear to have full control over dynamics—modwheel crossfades dynamic layers on the fly, so you can program in swells easily while the patterns are going.

I too noticed the way the notes were being "played" on the Kontakt interface, even though the sequencer showed static loop triggers. I wonder if that means there's some playability, but I think it might actually just be a feature that allows you to "see" what the patterns are if you're using the Komplete Kontrol series keyboards and their Light Guide.


----------



## germancomponist (Feb 19, 2015)

adriancook @ Thu Feb 19 said:


> germancomponist @ Thu Feb 19 said:
> 
> 
> > Christof @ Thu Feb 19 said:
> ...



You confuse something. I joke and do not attack someone! :D


----------



## Vision (Feb 19, 2015)

Marius Masalar @ Thu Feb 19 said:


> I too noticed the way the notes were being "played" on the Kontakt interface, even though the sequencer showed static loop triggers. I wonder if that means there's some playability, but I think it might actually just be a feature that allows you to "see" what the patterns are if you're using the Komplete Kontrol series keyboards and their Light Guide.



That makes sense.. a bit misleading though.


----------



## SamiMatar (Feb 19, 2015)

Action strings was a very good tool for my work. Sure, some of its phrases were simple staccatos but otherwise it did add a liveliness to my recordings with its legato/slur lines. 

Emotive strings appears to be the same concept and may be good for layering slower lines.


----------



## dpasdernick (Feb 19, 2015)

let's face it.. the future is a pimply faced dude with an Ipad triggering cues from every movie he illegally downloaded. Crafting notes? That's caveman stuff...

Besides, I was sure everyone got into music for the chicks, not the money, so if Emotive strings gets you chicks faster it's q no brainer.


----------



## Vision (Feb 19, 2015)

Ok.. so curiosity got the best of me. This is a pretty raw demo, based off of their arpeggio example. Took me about 10 minutes to set up the patches to my liking. Not using any dynamics or expression..

https://soundcloud.com/peterbrinkley/arpeggio-test


----------



## Rob Elliott (Feb 19, 2015)

Vision @ Thu Feb 19 said:


> Ok.. so curiosity got the best of me. This is a pretty raw demo, based off of their arpeggio example. Took me about 10 minutes to set up the patches to my liking. Not using any dynamics or expression..
> 
> https://soundcloud.com/peterbrinkley/arpeggio-test




Thanks Peter. Helpful. On my system here the 4K range sounds predominant. Can you try cutting that (wide Q) - 1.5 - 2.5 db. Let me know if it's less 'harse'. That was my issue with the Action Strings demos. You don't need to re-post that just let me know if still 'natural' with some 'air/life' left in it. Thanks.


----------



## Vision (Feb 19, 2015)

Rob Elliott @ Thu Feb 19 said:


> Vision @ Thu Feb 19 said:
> 
> 
> > Ok.. so curiosity got the best of me. This is a pretty raw demo, based off of their arpeggio example. Took me about 10 minutes to set up the patches to my liking. Not using any dynamics or expression..
> ...



Hey Rob. A little less harsh.. but didn't notice a huge difference. I can make the file downloadable if you want to play with it a bit. 

I'm curious, does anyone have an idea what I'm using? Also the end is a bit sloppy, but the whole point for me was to do very little editing, vs time constraints.


----------



## Rob Elliott (Feb 19, 2015)

Vision @ Thu Feb 19 said:


> Rob Elliott @ Thu Feb 19 said:
> 
> 
> > Vision @ Thu Feb 19 said:
> ...



That's ok Peter - thanks for doing and checking that.


----------



## Astronaut FX (Feb 19, 2015)

Lawson. @ Thu Feb 19 said:


> If this is what it seems like (another "Action Strings"- type library), then I'm not a fan.
> 
> [begin rant]
> 
> ...



I understand your point here, really I do.

But working musicians have struggled to adapt to the impact of technology for as long as musicians have tried to make music a business.

Technology paves the way for tools that enable tasks to be completed more easily, more quickly, and without the expertise once required for the task before technology. Musicians have consistently failed to adapt to how technology changes what they do.

Rather than adapt, they'd prefer to point to technological advances as "cheating" or making it too easy for the non-working musician. But you often draw arbitrary lines between what you find acceptable and what you don't.

I imagine it wasn't too long ago that using a DAW was considered cheating by the crusty old school engineers who cut their teeth on physical knobs and sliders. It wasn't that long ago that virtual instruments of all types were considered cheating. Synthesizers were cheating. But now, many of those tools, even you probably couldn't imagine working without.

Is it the threat the someone who "hasn't paid their dues" can now suddenly do what once upon a time only you could do? Is it the concern that these tools "take jobs away?"

Do you not see some hypocrisy in saying this particular tool is fine for the seasoned, working composer who is just trying to churn out some forgettable piece of background music, but when a non-working musician uses it, it's just cheating?

So let me ask this question. I would imagine some of the working composers here probably have their own website to market their work. Right? And I'm willing to bet that some of them use some really slick tools to build their own website, right? And I'd be willing to bet, there's some bitter web designer lamenting the fact that that tool exists, that allows some hack composer to churn out some uninspired, unoriginal website, thus taking food off of his table. But I bet you have no issue with that tool, because it saves you some cash.

Please don't feel like I'm attacking you personally. I just feel that musicians have a tendency to be very selective when it comes to what tools they feel threatened by, and which tools they think are perfectly fine, because they benefit them. Just suggesting another way of thinking about it.


----------



## dpasdernick (Feb 19, 2015)

Tone Deaf @ Thu Feb 19 said:


> Lawson. @ Thu Feb 19 said:
> 
> 
> > If this is what it seems like (another "Action Strings"- type library), then I'm not a fan.
> ...



+1... I thought about this thread on the drive home. I find there's some irony here that it seems to be OK to trigger a fake cello note with a keyboard but triggering a loop of a cello is wrong. I'm major guilty of condemning loops in the past after losing out composition work to a guy who used software that auto created music based on a genre you choose (can't remember the name).

If someone can buy this library, compose with it and sell there song oh well... we can all bitch and moan about cutting and pasting but there's a long line of people bitching about us using samples instead of real musicians...


----------



## Lawson. (Feb 19, 2015)

Vision @ Thu Feb 19 said:


> I'm curious, does anyone have an idea what I'm using? Also the end is a bit sloppy, but the whole point for me was to do very little editing, vs time constraints.



I'm gonna guess CineStrings or Mural. Sounds amazing!


----------



## kitekrazy (Feb 19, 2015)

For the price I'd prefer to spend on something else. I probably wouldn't bark at it on the 50% sale. It's an expensive loop library.


----------



## Vision (Feb 19, 2015)

Lawson. @ Thu Feb 19 said:


> Vision @ Thu Feb 19 said:
> 
> 
> > I'm curious, does anyone have an idea what I'm using? Also the end is a bit sloppy, but the whole point for me was to do very little editing, vs time constraints.
> ...



Hey Thanks.. nope  neither of those. Interesting. Any other guesses?


----------



## gyprock (Feb 19, 2015)

The blues has been played using the same phrases on the same guitars through the same amps for years. It is how the phrases are placed in the context of the overall piece that matters.

I can also guarantee that if you take a professional composer vs a pimply amateur and give them them a phrase based library to use in the context of a larger piece, you will still hear a big difference.

Also, phrase based libraries are great to get started and flesh out some ideas. If only one of those phrases is left in the final product, at least they got the juices flowing.

I find phrase based libraries particularly useful while trying to spot a film within a DAW. Placing a loop to see whether it should make a hit or flow through it at various tempos really helps to divide the piece up and determine where the bar lines should go.

The other thing that happens is that sometimes a loop will provide interesting rhythmic counterpoint to the scene that you would have never planned. The loop might have an accent on a particular note that just works beautifully with the drama on screen. That might trigger thematic ideas that can be developed. Whether the phrase actually remains in the forefront or gets put in the background then becomes the creative decision of the composer. You still need to be creative and you still need to make decisions.


----------



## Audio Genetics Lab (Feb 19, 2015)

Lawson. @ Thu Feb 19 said:


> That's an avant garde sound-design library. You don't generally compose and orchestrate sound-design.



I think several decades worth of synthesists and sound designers would disagree with you. It's just a matter of how much you break it down. 

You might not want to get down into the individual oscillators, filters, and LFO programming of a synth arpeggio, and plenty of people out there might not want to get down into the neck position, bow changes, and instrument splits of a string section chomping away on 8th notes.


----------



## Lawson. (Feb 19, 2015)

Audio Genetics Lab @ Thu Feb 19 said:


> Lawson. @ Thu Feb 19 said:
> 
> 
> > That's an avant garde sound-design library. You don't generally compose and orchestrate sound-design.
> ...



Sorry, I should've been clearer. I meant that you don't generally compose and orchestrate sound-design for an orchestra. I have nothing against synths and sound designers; I was just saying that usually people don't compose for traditional instruments with the intent of sound-design.

A synth you have to know exactly what you're doing: how to program it specifically to do what you want. Quite similar to orchestrating, except certain things (avant garde orchestras) aren't really possible to have in a library except for loops.


----------



## passenger57 (Feb 19, 2015)

I picked it up today, it's nice. I like the triplet and 16th note phrases. It's actually a bit less non nondescript than action strings in that you wouldn't recognize the patterns as they are pretty simple traditional minor/major patterns. They do help add a realism and feel that make it a worthwhile purchase for composers on a deadline who don't have alot of time to program strings.


----------



## Audio Genetics Lab (Feb 19, 2015)

Lawson. @ Thu Feb 19 said:


> Audio Genetics Lab @ Thu Feb 19 said:
> 
> 
> > Lawson. @ Thu Feb 19 said:
> ...



Ah, understood, thanks for clarifying. 

You actually put my point into better words than I did, too. You have to know what you're doing with a synth in similar ways to knowing what you're doing with a violin. I'm sure some people that hate these phrase libraries have no problem dropping in a great filtered stylus loop, or a layered synth pad, or some crazy modular glitch riser (and there is an equivalent angry "purist" synth/drum programmer out there who thinks those people are cheating as well).


----------



## Guido Negraszus (Feb 19, 2015)

passenger57 @ 20th February 2015 said:


> I picked it up today, it's nice. I like the triplet and 16th note phrases. It's actually a bit less non nondescript than action strings in that you wouldn't recognize the patterns as they are pretty simple traditional minor/major patterns. They do help add a realism and feel that make it a worthwhile purchase for composers on a deadline who don't have alot of time to program strings.



Do you have by any chance Sonokinetic libraries (Minimal / Capriccio)? I wonder how these strings compare. I'm still exploring Capriccio so not sure I really want to get this one too. It seems quite costly compared to Capriccio considering that you get a whole Orchestra vs only strings.


----------



## SuperD (Feb 19, 2015)

Guido Negraszus @ Fri Feb 20 said:


> passenger57 @ 20th February 2015 said:
> 
> 
> > I picked it up today, it's nice. I like the triplet and 16th note phrases. It's actually a bit less non nondescript than action strings in that you wouldn't recognize the patterns as they are pretty simple traditional minor/major patterns. They do help add a realism and feel that make it a worthwhile purchase for composers on a deadline who don't have alot of time to program strings.
> ...



I've also been curious about the Sonokinetic libraries. They carry a fairly big price tag. Do they also include phrases one cane use as with Emotive Strings? I listened to the ES samples this morning and wasn't all that impressed by the sound.


----------



## passenger57 (Feb 19, 2015)

> I've also been curious about the Sonokinetic libraries. They carry a fairly big price tag. Do they also include phrases one cane use as with Emotive Strings? I listened to the ES samples this morning and wasn't all that impressed by the sound



The Sonokinetic libraries are an incredible bargain for what you get. Their Minimal library has some string passages that are similar to ES and are a bit more organic sounding to me. 

ES is nice, but like Action Strings they are a bit more raw sounding and take a little tweaking to get them to sit in a mix with other samples. 

I also enjoy the libraries that have 'playable' 3 or 4 note patterns that are small enough to create your own phrases while still sounding like real players. Something like Orchestral Tools String Runs is a good example.


----------



## NYC Composer (Feb 19, 2015)

Isn't the logical conclusion to these sort of phrase libraries longer and longer phrases with multiple tracks of instrumental sections, until eventually, you've bought someone else's composition royalty free and you're able to re-sell it as your own?

It seems a lot of gainfully employed people are needing to compose vast amounts of stuff in ridiculously small time frames. I get that- but at what point are you not composing but really cutting and pasting actual compositions by others? We're not quite there yet, but it seems to be getting closer and closer.

I've given up hating on this stuff, so please don't go there. I think it's a legitimate question.


----------



## passenger57 (Feb 20, 2015)

NYC Composer @ Fri Feb 20 said:


> Isn't the logical conclusion to these sort of phrase libraries longer and longer phrases with multiple tracks of instrumental sections, until eventually, you've bought someone else's composition royalty free and you're able to re-sell it as your own?
> 
> It seems a lot of gainfully employed people are needing to compose vast amounts of stuff in ridiculously small time frames. I get that- but at what point are you not composing but really cutting and pasting actual compositions by others? We're not quite there yet, but it seems to be getting closer and closer.
> 
> I've given up hating on this stuff, so please don't go there. I think it's a legitimate question.



I guess it really depends on how you use it. Ascending and descending triplet and 16th note patterns have been used by thousands of composers, in millions of combinations for hundreds of years. If your talking about a musical phrase that is more composed, then that's a different story and thats probably what your talking about. Personally can't stand the sound of fake strings and I'm always in a rush, so I find these libraries helpful. I always make sure my cues are composed without them, I just use them to make the synthestrations sound more realistic here and there.


----------



## woodsdenis (Feb 20, 2015)

Tone Deaf @ Fri Feb 20 said:


> Lawson. @ Thu Feb 19 said:
> 
> 
> > If this is what it seems like (another "Action Strings"- type library), then I'm not a fan.
> ...



Well said, this forum is VI Control after all, how some people around here look down on this as "cheating" and then load up LASS and think it isn't is beyond me.


----------



## Daniel James (Feb 20, 2015)

I have never understood the hatred for these types of libraries. Almost seems like people are somehow threatened by their existence.

I remember the exact same arguments when Action Strings was released and they have carried over to this: "pfft just for noobs to sound good" "Its cheating" etc. 

The way to look at these libraries is sectioned recording sessions. Like with Action strings, lets say in your track you plan to have a 16th spiccato pattern that just goes between the 1 and 3 of a Cm. Now you could pull up a spic patch and program it in....but then realise that they recorded this exact phrase in action strings....so at that point to me it makes sense to use the phrase...it doesn't change your compositional intent, it doesn't change your artistic ability, you are simply swapping out the synthetic individual spic notes for a real recorded phrase, which as I explained for action strings, delivers a more realistic feeling to the passage....because its a real recording.

Now I was watching the Emo Strings vid and I felt the exact reaction I had to Action Strings, which was: Hey I use that technique all the time, but now I can use an actual recorded phrase of it. Again it hasnt changed the intent of my work, or my abilities as a composer. I am simply swapping out the synthetically created lines from midi with a real recording of the same thing.

I get to a point that some people don't look at this like that at all and think hey now I can sound like I know what I am doing...but as others pointed out those are not normally the best of composers when it comes to being flexible, so I don't see a real threat of anything there.

Also from an educational standpoint I also spotted some phrases I have never attempted in my music before. So if I find something in there that inspires me forward musically then I have learned a new technique for the future. Lol I literally don't see a major downside to these types of libraries at all.

-DJ


----------



## Daryl (Feb 20, 2015)

I don't see the problem. A composer who writes crappy music will still be writing crappy music. Using orchestral loops is no different to using Stylus, IMO. Obviously, if the phrase is the composition, then it will sound like everyone elses compositions, who are using the same tool. However, how is that much different to what we hear now in the media? Not much, in my view.

So if someone wants to use this library, let them. No skin off my nose.

D


----------



## AC986 (Feb 20, 2015)

I don't see anything as a threat. Having to do stuff in small times frames is a threat. What I thought was, it doesn't actually _sound_ very good. I will check the video out again. No doubt Daniel will be doing a video.


----------



## Daniel James (Feb 20, 2015)

adriancook @ Fri Feb 20 said:


> I don't see anything as a threat. Having to do stuff in small times frames is a threat. What I thought was, it doesn't actually _sound_ very good. I will check the video out again. No doubt Daniel will be doing a video.



Sounded pretty good to me, but thats a preference thing. I particually liked this phrase,


man the amount of times I have written a line like that but it doesn't flow with the samples (or all the time I put into trying to line up where the legato transition hits). It sounds way to dry in the video but I know with some verb on it, it will flow right into a mix.

I havn't actually got any plans to do a vid on this one yet. Still got tons of other stuff to do. Maybe though, I may wait for the next Komplete though xD

-DJ


----------



## Daryl (Feb 20, 2015)

Daniel James @ Fri Feb 20 said:


> man the amount of times I have written a line like that but it doesn't flow with the samples (or all the time I put into trying to line up where the legato transition hits). It sounds way to dry in the video but I know with some verb on it, it will flow right into a mix.


I think you've proved my point very well. Anyone who sequences what you did, and thinks that this is composing, obviously has no idea of what has been written over the last 400 years (and I know you know that, so I'm not accusing you of thinking that this is composing....!).

A composer would never leave it empty and, as you point out, it could sit very well in a mix. A mix, being the operative phrase. It wouldn't be used on its own, and if it saves someone spending hours tweaking individual notes on something that is only a background noise anyway, there is nothing wrong in using it.

D


----------



## Guy Rowland (Feb 20, 2015)

Yeaaaah.....

Well Daniel if you do a walkthrough I'll watch with interest, there just doesn't seem enough info now to get a clear idea of where it is genuinely useful. In general I've gone off some of these clever phrase libraries of late, mostly because when all is said and done they don't save me half as much time as I'd have hoped. Grosso ended up just doing my head in when I tried to use it in anger, I'll confess I haven't looked at Sonokinetic's latest. I've used Action Strings once or twice, but usually either LASS' ART does it better and simpler or frankly just playing / sequencing the damn thing is just as quick for a few bars. I tend to only think of these sorts of libraries where there's some kind of effect or unusual playing style that leaves regular multisamples wanting.

I too find the whole debate about how these libraries spell the end of all composition pretty boring. I'm more pragmatic - is it actually useful? Maybe it is - I'd be interested to know more, but right now the jury's out for me.


----------



## AC986 (Feb 20, 2015)

Hehe. Daryl, lets face it, there are a lot of rockers nowadays. Orchestral rock music thanks to sample libraries. A lot of string players have aching arms and wrists that have to do film music.


----------



## blougui (Feb 20, 2015)

Guy Rowland @ Fri Feb 20 said:


> Grosso ended up just doing my head in when I tried to use it in anger,



Sorry for being out of topic but Guy, would you mind explain why ? Is it cumbersome to program ? I'm interested in Grosso or the latest incarnation and might want to grab it in the end - as a non classical trained musician I think it could be helpful to understand a few thing about arrangements and basic orchestration. thanx !
Erik


----------



## Guy Rowland (Feb 20, 2015)

blougui @ Fri Feb 20 said:


> Guy Rowland @ Fri Feb 20 said:
> 
> 
> > Grosso ended up just doing my head in when I tried to use it in anger,
> ...



_(off topic - it might be me just being stupid but having not used it since an initial play I found it incredibly difficult to get a meaningful sound out of it - the logic is kinda funky. The programming and scripting is super-clever, but imo not that easy to use in practice. Also the 12/8 thing becomes much more of an issue in practice of course. It could all be me, but we buy these libraries often to speed things up and when they don't seem intuitive, the motivation to make the damn thing work kinda goes pretty fast for me, and I find another simpler way to do a similar thing. I really should spend more time with it cos there are some nice and useful things in there though. OK, back on topic)._


----------



## blougui (Feb 20, 2015)

_Ok, thanx for taking the time to answer, Guy. Back on topic now _

Erik


----------



## Waywyn (Feb 20, 2015)

I really thought by now it should be obvious that the tools don't define the composer/producer! Crappy composers will always compose crappy music, even with the LSO available at Abbey Road! Give TJ a set of General MIDI files and he will outblow 50% of the forum (if not more)!

... anyway, haters gonna hate!


----------



## AC986 (Feb 20, 2015)

Grosso wasn't their finest hour, although you can get round the 12/8 with some sequencer trickery and then it becomes a lot more useful.

Hey Alex!! How many tracks do you use on average for one of your taiko/big/sounding drum only tracks? 

Sorry for the OT here gents.


----------



## benmrx (Feb 20, 2015)

I must be in the minority because I think Grosso is pretty great. I like the 12/8 thing though and I find the general layout and scripting to be really intuitive.


----------



## shapeshifter00 (Feb 20, 2015)

Daniel James @ Fri Feb 20 said:


> adriancook @ Fri Feb 20 said:
> 
> 
> > I don't see anything as a threat. Having to do stuff in small times frames is a threat. What I thought was, it doesn't actually _sound_ very good. I will check the video out again. No doubt Daniel will be doing a video.
> ...




I like it, still too overpriced for me, but I guess it will be included in Komplete 11 Ultimate so can get it then perhaps.


----------



## NYC Composer (Feb 20, 2015)

Too funny. I pose a serious question. I state I don't hate on anything, I get back "haters gonna hate. " not one answer to "isn't this the logical conclusion to..?" No, instead, crappy composers are always gonna sound crappy. Ok, how about medicore, lazy composers? Think they can stick a perc loop and a horn blat two here and there, then Bob's yer uncle?

I find that these discussion inevitably lack any nuance or give any nod to possibility.
To the point that I'll state it again and try to be clearer.

Let's say I write 50 full orchestral pieces of three minutes or so, all instruments in sections with an additional hundred solo riffs sections. Some sections will be ostinato in various keys. Big endings, various flourishes rumbling perc loops with flexible ends. I will cleverly make some be able to go with others easily, perhaps 20 different melodic variations over 30 generic ostinatos or fast single note reps. Of course everything is tempo synced to the host, and all keys can move within a fifth, and all meldies can change as it comes with a version of Celmony. I call it "Ultimate Epic". 
Have I sold you yet?

Point being, isn't this where things are heading? Quality work done by mixing and matching, cutting and pasting, sounds terrific (as I think the Sonokinetic stuff does.) think of the time saved!

Once again(sigh) i do not HATE anything. If you wanted to use an _accurate_ word, it would be disconcerted, exactly how I felt about construction sets from Big Fish years ago.


----------



## Ian Dorsch (Feb 20, 2015)

adriancook @ Fri Feb 20 said:


> I don't see anything as a threat. Having to do stuff in small times frames is a threat. What I thought was, it doesn't actually _sound_ very good.



That was my impression as well. I'm not crazy about the timbre, and in that department there is a substantial gap between ES and every string library I own.


----------



## Daniel James (Feb 20, 2015)

NYC Composer @ Fri Feb 20 said:


> Too funny. I pose a serious question. I state I don't hate on anything, I get back "haters gonna hate. " not one answer to "isn't this the logical conclusion to..?" No, instead, crappy composers are always gonna sound crappy. Ok, how about medicore, lazy composers? Think they can stick a perc loop and a horn blat two here and there, then Bob's yer uncle?
> 
> I find that these discussion inevitably lack any nuance or give any nod to possibility.
> To the point that I'll state it again and try to be clearer.
> ...



Its all about compositional intent. I mean at the end of the day there is a good chance alot of the techniques people use in their music have been done many times before. What I was saying was that if you are intending to use a technique in your track that is in a phrase library, why not use the phrase instead of trying to fake it up with your samples.... I mean the nuance of the recorded performance adds a bit of a natural feel to the part and I see it almost like having parts of my cue recorded live.

And yes lazy and mediocre composers will probably take the library and throw shit together, but while they may take a job or two now, they will lack the flexibility to compete against the composers who actually know what they are doing and can make the tools work for them as apposed to the opposite. 

And as always I recommend people read this and relax a little xD
http://i.imgur.com/j4z61uI.jpg

-DJ


----------



## NYC Composer (Feb 20, 2015)

I am so chill, there are icicles forming on my beard.


----------



## Daniel James (Feb 20, 2015)

like this?

http://www.hahastop.com/pictures/Icicle_Beard.jpg


----------



## José Herring (Feb 20, 2015)

I think the haters are missing the point. Everything is so generic in this library that you'd have to write something around it or on top of it in order to make any real music out of it. So for some reason I don't see this as any different than a single note sample. Just that these kinds of phrases are so hard to do convincingly with traditional samples. But the name is misleading I think. "Emotive Strings". Nothing particularly emotive about them. Should be more accompaniment strings. Some common accompaniment patters that as mentioned are hard to do with samples if not impossible. 

Unlike Action Strings which I felt was instant library track in a box, this is something that would be hard to sell as a piece by itself and further more unless you really have an idea of how these accompaniments work, then no amateur will be able to make sense of them. Most amateurs won't even know what to do with this so they'll never even buy it.


----------



## NYC Composer (Feb 20, 2015)

Daniel James @ Fri Feb 20 said:


> like this?
> 
> http://www.hahastop.com/pictures/Icicle_Beard.jpg



Yeah, but it looks better on me.


----------



## procreative (Feb 20, 2015)

To all those that get antsy about phrase libraries I expect your self promotion to include:

1. Hand coded html and php for your website done in a text editor - no Wordpress templates bought from Themeforest or using Moonfruit or such.

2. No clip art or photo library imagery - only artwork you have personally drawn and pictures you have taken.

I am a graphic designer and the plethora of free or cheap design tools has seriously eroded my earning potential over the last 15-20 years, but I am sure you are not going to feel guilty about not hiring a designer and pay the going rate.

If you really are going to be so pious, no more using samples or DAWs, from now on only a Piano, paper and pencil. And when you want an orchestral sound, hire real players at great expense to build your 'mockups'.

Seriously we can all argue the merits of phrases and shortcuts, would you rubbish Strawberry Fields as it used a Mellotron.

And what about composers who have "assistants" that write many uncredited sections of their work or session players that contribute signature parts that get attributed to the "artist". Its nothing new, just another way to do it.

However there are many writers who combine elements from different genres to create something interesting and this product is one of many great springboards. For some it might be the backbone, for others a counterpoint.

The main question is whether this product is good i.e. good sounding or flexible enough to be moulded. 

Many slagged Action Strings, but it has some really great features no-one else implemented such as you can switch melody in the middle of the phrase and it keeps playing in the cycle enabling some interesting variations (I think Daniel demonstrated this in his video).

Also by switching phrases within the cycle you can create infinite new rhythms.

Its also a very useful brainstorming tool for new ideas.

Not sure why this product and the latest one got singled out for so much ire when Capriccio, Vivace, Grosso etc did not. And then there's UIST which also has phrases (even if it makes you feel better that their so avante garde).


----------



## NYC Composer (Feb 20, 2015)

You forgot the invention of the wheel and the advantage it gave over others in agrarian times.

Good lord- I give. Winner winner chicken dinner.


----------



## procreative (Feb 20, 2015)

Christof @ Thu Feb 19 said:


> I just came back from a recording session for a music library, we recorded about 25 pieces by different composers.
> Some did a very good job with notation and score preparation, but many did an awful job. They had absolutely no idea how to notate and how a cello works.



Surely this music library should have hired an orchestrator to prepare the scores for your session? Sounds like they were cutting costs and corners?

I mean no disrespect to you, as you are a working professional musician, but music is music and if it sounds good surely thats the whole point? You cannot dismiss a composition just because the composer could not write on staves?

I am sure if Mozart had used a DAW...


----------



## procreative (Feb 20, 2015)

NYC Composer @ Fri Feb 20 said:


> You forgot the invention of the wheel and the advantage it gave over others in agrarian times.
> 
> Good lord- I give. Winner winner chicken dinner.



No need its not a contest, I am only trying to give some perspective. 

Nobody likes to see someone else do something without training and achieve comparable or "good enough" results but thats how it is for the poor graphic designer (as it was for the photo typesetter when the Mac came along 30 years ago and as it was for the hot metal typesetter when computer setting came along 40 years ago).

So unless we smash up all technology its the way it is.

At the end of the day its how you use the tools. Many composers write from scratch but still end up sounding the same anyway with their spiccatos and sliding legato lines with bombastic taikos etc.

Good music is good music. As my design teacher used to say:

"You can't polish a turd"


----------



## procreative (Feb 20, 2015)

Anyway rant over, I rarely post cos it always gets tense! Peace to all and we can all choose what we like and don't like.

This is just my opinion.


----------



## NYC Composer (Feb 20, 2015)

procreative @ Fri Feb 20 said:


> NYC Composer @ Fri Feb 20 said:
> 
> 
> > You forgot the invention of the wheel and the advantage it gave over others in agrarian times.
> ...



Good music is what people think it is. Some think Mahler is divine. Some think 50 Cent is the shizzle. Many people disagree on "good."

I wrote for drums, horns , strings in the 70s and 80s. By the mid eighties I was writing for samples, drum machines, etc. I'm part of the problem! Eventually they come for you.

What i'm saying is this- when speed and cost become the only determinant factors and these orchestral construction kits become de rigeur, you will see a lot of lower level composers out of work as music editors and supervisors with a bare knowledge of MIDI technology start "composing" their "own music"- and jobs, already scarce, will become scarcer. Moreover, the lower tier music libraries will be even more inundated with instant-music.
I have already seen these thing happen in the industry, and they're happening now. This isn't some sort of bemoaning conclusion I've drawn cause I'm a "hater"! These are facts. Absorb them or ignore them as you wish. My bread's been buttered so it's no skin offa my onion. I might even grab a pack of phrase libraries and pump out twice as many tracks.


----------



## Astronaut FX (Feb 20, 2015)

You're not wrong Larry. But technology has impacted virtually every industry. Why should the music industry be any different?

Is technology causing loss of paying gigs, or were there just too many people competing for too few jobs?


----------



## playz123 (Feb 20, 2015)

Tone Deaf @ Fri Feb 20 said:


> You're not wrong Larry. But technology has impacted virtually every industry. Why should the music industry be any different?
> 
> Is technology causing loss of paying gigs, or were there just too many people competing for too few jobs?



IMHO.....both!

And Larry is never wrong  or perhaps I just agree with him all the time.

So much of this thread has been focused on whether or not phrases are a good thing and their impact. Not surprising. But I'm still focused on what I mentioned earlier...it's the "sound" of the orchestra in Action Strings and in this library that isn't appealing to me. They also don't seem to sit well with some other libraries. I'm not saying the sound is bad; just not appealing to me. So I was searching for opinions in that area as well. Am I wrong (unlike Larry)?


----------



## NYC Composer (Feb 20, 2015)

playz123 @ Fri Feb 20 said:


> Tone Deaf @ Fri Feb 20 said:
> 
> 
> > You're not wrong Larry. But technology has impacted virtually every industry. Why should the music industry be any different?
> ...



Hahaha Frank! Actually, I'm fine with being wrong, but as the Animals once sang so plaintively: "oh Lord, please don't let me be misunderstood....." :wink:


----------



## AR (Feb 21, 2015)

I heard some very promising phrases in the demos, which I'm going to use soon. But unfortunately they did not record far mics this time. I was always wondering if the far mics in action string are actually real far mics or just a few meters away from the players. It's a pitty they did not record like the amazing Sonokinetic team.


----------



## Christof (Feb 21, 2015)

> Surely this music library should have hired an orchestrator to prepare the scores for your session? Sounds like they were cutting costs and corners?
> 
> I mean no disrespect to you, as you are a working professional musician, but music is music and if it sounds good surely thats the whole point? You cannot dismiss a composition just because the composer could not write on staves?
> 
> I am sure if Mozart had used a DAW...



As a player I can dismiss a composition if it is not notated properly or if there are things in the piece that are impossible to play or read.
Especially in the studio where time is money.
This is a big issue.I think I will open a new topic on this, because it is important.

I think that every composer who calls himself a professional should make his homework in orchestration and instrumentation.
There are good books out there.
There are musicians to ask.

Mozart and a DAW, this might be a worthy discussion, but I guess he would have written the same music, he had his DAW in his brain, everything composed and orchestrated before he brought it to paper.


----------



## AC986 (Feb 21, 2015)

playz123 @ Fri Feb 20 said:


> I'm not saying the sound is bad; just not appealing to me. So I was searching for opinions in that area as well. Am I wrong (unlike Larry)?



Need to see a full video Frank, but based on what I've seen and heard so far, the sound isn't great. It almost sounds dead, or flat (flat as in the room sound). Time will tell.


----------



## procreative (Feb 21, 2015)

I have noticed this seems to be common with NI branded libraries, a distinct lack of walkthroughs (apart from Heavyocity stuff).

I like the concept but the videos tell me nothing about what it sounds like and what its like to use.

The intro video seems to indicate legato lines but the example clips do not really demonstrate this, they seem more like ostinatos and spiccato lines.

Wish all developers would put up proper walkthroughs especially for £249.


----------



## AC986 (Feb 21, 2015)

procreative @ Sat Feb 21 said:


> Wish all developers would put up proper walkthroughs especially for £249.



Oh yeah! Some developers charge even more than that, and don't have the library on the main page of Kontakt. :wink:


----------



## Guido Negraszus (Feb 21, 2015)

Ok, this is my first NI purchase outside the Komplete cycle for many years. First impression: underwhelmed. There are some nice low strings phrases and the arpeggios sound quite good too. The ostinato patches sound terrible in my opinion unless I'm using them wrongly. Like I said, just a first impression. I'm sure there are some useful patches in there.

But honestly, if I compare this to Sonokinetic's Capriccio its an awful deal. Capriccio gives you for almost the same money so much more: strings, brass, woodwinds, percussion, runs. I also think that the audio quality is superior compared to Emotive Strings.

@Guy: if you only got "Grosso" its a shame because of the 12/8 and overall triplet feel. Minimal and Capriccio are much more "usable" for the usual 4/4 work. And I really like the new "drag midi to host feature" which I already use all the time so I can double up with my own libraries. I think that Sonokinetic is the reference at this point of time in regards to Orchestral phrases.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Feb 21, 2015)

Guido Negraszus @ Sat Feb 21 said:


> Ok, this is my first NI purchase outside the Komplete cycle for many years. First impression: underwhelmed. There are some nice low strings phrases and the arpeggios sound quite good too. The ostinato patches sound terrible in my opinion unless I'm using them wrongly. Like I said, just a first impression. I'm sure there are some useful patches in there.
> 
> But honestly, if I compare this to Sonokinetic's Capriccio its an awful deal. Capriccio gives you for almost the same money so much more: strings, brass, woodwinds, percussion, runs. I also think that the audio quality is superior compared to Emotive Strings.
> 
> @Guy: if you only got "Grosso" its a shame because of the 12/8 and overall triplet feel. Minimal and Capriccio are much more "usable" for the usual 4/4 work. And I really like the new "drag midi to host feature" which I already use all the time so I can double up with my own libraries. I think that Sonokinetic is the reference at this point of time in regards to Orchestral phrases.



Interesting, thanks for the review. The 12/8 in Grosso was only half the issue in my case - I genuinely struggled to get useful sounds out of it in general, I didn't find it intuitive to use at all. Played in isolation I was quite positive, but I didn't find it so useful in anger when I thought I could use it.

It represents a general feeling I've been getting that the more clever phrase libraries get, the harder they might be to use, which becomes sort of self-defeating. If it's a sound you can't get any other way then fair enough, but if I can achieve much the same effect in an easier way then it'll just gather virtual dust. I dunno, I might change my mind again on this, but I'm a bit phrase-sceptic at the moment, hence I'm reluctant to look at the new library.

In general I've become ever more enthusiastic about the ProjectSAM multis when it comes to working quickly. You have total compositional control, it helps you work fast, and there's huge tonal variety.


----------



## AC986 (Feb 21, 2015)

Listening to the arps again, I think it almost sounds muffled.


----------



## Vastman (Feb 21, 2015)

I purchased action strings after Daniel's video walkthrough. I have none of the antagonism against such libraries for the same reasons others have mentioned...

I primarily compose "songs" addressing climate change, transition to renewables, corportate control, and all those "planetary" issues staring us in the face. I'm a singer and songwriter. Learned guitar and bass as a kid. Played in bands all my life...since the beginning of midi till todays amazing DAWs, the power to wrap my songs in amazing sounds has exploded.

These are just tools. I am NOT an orchestrator. 

However, I do find Action Strings just SUCKS soundwise. Didn't fully realize this till I purchased Albion (now own 1,2,3) and fell in love with the exquisite sound. However, the time and brainpower necessary to properly use Spitfire's unique interface I honestly...struggle with.

Recently picked up OE1&2 after watching Guy's vids and these are much easier to wield within a "song", whether it be a country, metal, emo, or rock/folksy idea I have. Yet I still come back to Albion and little by little I'm developing Sonar templates which I can use in a so so fashion. I'm loving both Albion and Orchestral Essentials and have a hard time even contemplating using Action Strings or Session Strings Pro these days. Wish Spitfire would come up with an easier to use Ostinatum but aside from this, the Albion range just glistens...

I will NEVER be the orchestral composer most of you are and do not derive an income from it at the moment. I'm a story teller, using my voice and vst tools.

These are all tools, as is omnisphere, stratosphere, shreddage, damage, and all the zillion other things I've acquired. The main difference is Action Strings/SSpro sounds cheesy! So, I assume this will too.

I will probably not get Emotive Strings unless they sound much better than Action Strings. I appreciate this thread however, as I am looking at Capricclo right now! At least Sonokinetic has videos which realistically depict what can be done.

Actually, I can't imagine getting Emotive Strings after looking at Capriccio... WOW!


----------



## germancomponist (Feb 21, 2015)

NYC Composer @ Sat Feb 21 said:


> What i'm saying is this- when speed and cost become the only determinant factors and these orchestral construction kits become de rigeur, you will see a lot of lower level composers out of work as music editors and supervisors with a bare knowledge of MIDI technology start "composing" their "own music"- and jobs, already scarce, will become scarcer. Moreover, the lower tier music libraries will be even more inundated with instant-music.
> I have already seen these thing happen in the industry, and they're happening now. This isn't some sort of bemoaning conclusion I've drawn cause I'm a "hater"! These are facts. Absorb them or ignore them as you wish. My bread's been buttered so it's no skin offa my onion. I might even grab a pack of phrase libraries and pump out twice as many tracks.



This, exactly this!


----------



## Vastman (Feb 21, 2015)

I'm going to get philosophical here...and some might feel it's way off topic but I think it's right on topic...the mega version of the topic being discussed in this thread and until we (everyone) gets it, we're fracked...

This is the fundamental issue facing our society today... people everywhere are loosing jobs to tech/AI/robotics... as all orchestral players have been severely cramped by sample libraries you use. Drummers vs drum machines... organic farmers vs corporate computer run tractors...

It's sad that we all just see our own little niche... divided we have little power...ultimately a new model of sustenance must emerge beyond the global corporate dollar driven control paradigm which is unfolding. Climate and other tipping points will hopefully shove the old models over a cliff before we're undone as a species.

In the mean time, I'll use the tools to create these messages for only in a world which unfolds as the "next generation" version of star trek will we be able to truly pursue our passions without fighting like dogs over felonious economic tidbits doled out by the elite.

At some point we need to "progress" beyond the models we're currently using as they're running up against planetary limits...

scraps... fighting over scraps...while our entire species is in jeaprody... 

NYC Composer, I feel your pain... many on the streets these days without jobs echo your thoughts... and it really is a much bigger issue... the same issue...everywhere.

free market isn't free.... money is control... all this working against planetary forces which I hope will knock it all down so we can rebuild beyond these phony dollar divided walls


----------



## NYC Composer (Feb 21, 2015)

The empowerment that the democratization of technology's engendered has made everyone an artist. That's great for people looking for their inner artist. It's bad when it sends jobs that formerly went to talented professionals to barely musical editors, brothers-in-law and pals who once played guitar in high school. Sort of a friend-ocracy.

Insta-orchestras make people who were formerly Apple Loop artists into orchestral composers. Now THAT's progress!


----------



## Astronaut FX (Feb 21, 2015)

NYC Composer @ Sat Feb 21 said:


> The empowerment that the democratization of technology's engendered has made everyone an artist. That's great for people looking for their inner artist. It's bad when it sends jobs that formerly went to talented professionals to barely musical editors, brothers-in-law and pals who once played guitar in high school. Sort of a friend-ocracy.
> 
> Insta-orchestras make people who were formerly Apple Loop artists into orchestral composers. Now THAT's progress!



All true. And in some way, all of this pertains to other industries as well. Music is not immune to the effects of technology. You can't have it both ways...you can't make music a business, but then want to be immune to factors that impact all other businesses.

So what are you going to do to adapt as a working musician? That's where the energy should be placed, not bemoaning the latest technological advance that hits just a little bit closer to home than the last one.

Are you ready to uninstall your DAW and start paying someone to record, mix, and master your sessions? I didn't think so.

You know, music is a human invention. We've placed rules around audio phenomenon, and have ascribed a "theory" around it, and organized it according to what we've defined as pleasing. But creating music that moves people is not, and has never been something that can be accomplished by an elite, members only, special club made up by those who have satisfied their own "dues paying" entry fee.

Anyone, with any level of skill can create something that moves people. That is truly the beauty of music. Why shouldn't art be open to everyone? It doesn't have to be difficult to achieve to be meaningful to someone as a listener. And if technology is closing the gap between what the novice can do, and what the working musician can do, then I still say the problem was that there were already too many people competing for the same dollar.

Not every kid who picks up a ball makes it to the NBA/NFL/MLB, but for whatever reason, so many musicians somehow feel they're entitled to make a living through music. And then when there aren't enough paychecks to go around, somehow it's someone else's fault, or let's blame technology.

C'mon, let's face it...with the exception of a very small percentage of VI Controllers who may be composing for feature films, a fair amount of the composing gigs that we're talking about here is background mood music that generally isn't given a second thought after its heard by the final audience.

I don't mean to make light of what anyone does, but if jobs are starting to dry up, because that background mood music can be generated more affordably than paying you, your only recourse is to adapt, and find some other way to keep a steady income, musically or otherwise.

Others have done it successfully. Hell, look at how many composers are now making money by creating the tools you use. They've adapted. Another unrelated example...ever heard of Savatage? They were a goth/glam/dungeons and dragons metal band in the mid to late eighties. Around the mid-nineties they saw the writing on the wall and knew that the grunge movement had all but buried metal. Did they pack it in? Nope. They formed Trans-Siberian Orchestra and have made a freakin' fortune. Adapt.


----------



## procreative (Feb 21, 2015)

Larry on democratisation, when the Beatles or ELO used the Mellotron they had a distinct advantage over other bands that could not afford the mega price tag. It gave them sounds others could not achieve and their records a hook.

Similarly when Stock Aitken and Waterman had the Fairlight they churned out tune after tune using their formula at a rate other writers could not match (I won't claim the musical merits although initially their sound gave a big boost to Dead Or Alive).

Both these systems were so costly only those with mega budgets could use them.

But money does not equal talent always, so giving everyone the tools means the playing field is level again. Much like when Punk swept away Prog excess, sure some of the music was basic and often crap, but it ignited the possibility that we could all dream.

Much like in my industry, the best talent and biggest players (those with the best contacts) will still get the great jobs. The rest will fight it out over the scraps.

These kind of products will appeal to the small indie filmmakers and production houses. But would they be great to work for anyway?

Anyway, personally I cannot see much in it between using phrases and orchestral instruments when it comes to sampling. Yes you are writing the parts, but you are still taking work away from a session player (Im sure all the guitarists, drummers and backing vocalists feel just as pissed [off] as the classical types.

Bottom line is does it give you as much satisfaction using phrases? No
Is it as easy to make them fit your vision? No
Are they great fun to play with? Yes
Do they give us less classically trained composers some inspiration? Yes

But not all phrase libraries are created equal and some require a lot of work to make them work, so if you are skilled enough many times you can program the same thing yourself using the straight libraries.

I am still not sure what to make of this one until I see a walkthrough.


----------



## Vastman (Feb 21, 2015)

And be sure to compare it to Sonokinetic's Cappriccio... still listening to their demos and I can't believe I missed this. A great creative tool for a songwriter like me. For about the same price, can't imagine getting Emotive (although I love the name!)


----------



## gsilbers (Feb 21, 2015)

Vastman @ Sat Feb 21 said:


> And be sure to compare it to Sonokinetic's Cappriccio... still listening to their demos and I can't believe I missed this. A great creative tool for a songwriter like me. For about the same price, can't imagine getting Emotive (although I love the name!)



i didnt like that cappriccio only can do 3 note major and minor chords. seems limiting.


----------



## gsilbers (Feb 21, 2015)

Daniel James @ Fri Feb 20 said:


> adriancook @ Fri Feb 20 said:
> 
> 
> > I don't see anything as a threat. Having to do stuff in small times frames is a threat. What I thought was, it doesn't actually _sound_ very good. I will check the video out again. No doubt Daniel will be doing a video.
> ...




im not liking the sound too much. hope there is more dry sounds. 

also, if anyone is interested, nora 2 helps out a lot with ese type of arpeggios or repetetive lines
https://www.squaredheads.com/downloads.php


----------



## NYC Composer (Feb 21, 2015)

"Are you ready to uninstall your DAW and start paying someone to record, mix, and master your sessions?"

In a heartbeat! Can I afford it? Sadly not.

However, the analogy is flawed. My DAW hasn't composed a thing for me. It spouts forth no phrases, it refuses to hire an Eastern European orchestra....

Damn you, Cubase!


----------



## Astronaut FX (Feb 21, 2015)

NYC Composer @ Sat Feb 21 said:


> "Are you ready to uninstall your DAW and start paying someone to record, mix, and master your sessions?"
> 
> In a heartbeat! Can I afford it? Sadly not.
> 
> ...



The analogy works from the standpoint that one group within the music industry (composers) has already leveraged a piece of technology to eliminate/reduce the need for another group within the music industry (recording/mixing/mastering engineers) from the process. _Now_ if your fears are legitimate, certain sample phrasing libraries are threatening to eliminate the need for the composer.


----------



## Guido Negraszus (Feb 21, 2015)

gsilbers @ 22nd February 2015 said:


> Vastman @ Sat Feb 21 said:
> 
> 
> > And be sure to compare it to Sonokinetic's Cappriccio... still listening to their demos and I can't believe I missed this. A great creative tool for a songwriter like me. For about the same price, can't imagine getting Emotive (although I love the name!)
> ...



That's not entirely true. They have the Harmonic Shift feature. From the manual: 

"The Harmonic Shift function allows the user to play phrases simultaneously in different, but related, keys. This function can be used to access more complex chords other than the standard major / minor phrases within Capriccio."

I haven't personally used this feature yet so I can't say how useful it is but I do understand why Sonokinetic didn't offer more types of chords. It's already a huge library with 3 mic settings. Just adding 3 more different chords would have doubled it to 100GB. So the Harmonic Shift feature is a good compromise I guess.

I can't stress it any more then I already have: Capriccio is a bargain. Alone the percussion section (loops and playable) would be worth the money alone.


----------



## gsilbers (Feb 21, 2015)

Tone Deaf @ Sat Feb 21 said:


> NYC Composer @ Sat Feb 21 said:
> 
> 
> > "Are you ready to uninstall your DAW and start paying someone to record, mix, and master your sessions?"
> ...



very good point. the end of your statement id like to add "reduce" and not eliminate. 
reduce is still substatial if we compare to how it is with the reduction of recording/mixing/mastering engineers.


----------



## procreative (Feb 26, 2015)

After a few questions to the company director, I decided to take the plunge.

First impressions?

Better than I thought, a lot of the phrases are sufficiently nondescript enough to work in any key. 

The trick with this and Action strings is that you can change note mid phrase cycle and it opens up infinite possibilities, especially if you keyswitch to other phrases.

What I do find unique in this product is the ability to switch note in the middle of a phrase without the next note retriggering from the start. I have Adagio and their expressive patches do not do this, so if you want to change notes in a triad for instance to create a progression, it won't work as it plays the notes from the beginning of the loop.

I have Capriccio and Minimal and while these are indeed great products, they are different. Firstly they are triad driven, forcing you to use fairly fixed combinations and they use pretty preset melodic phrases. The options are pretty huge but they are still fixed in terms of melodic content.

I think Emotive Strings used correctly is not a shortcut to a result, its not as immediate as writing a legato line as you have to have an idea of what you want to achieve unless you are fitting a piece around it rather than the other way round.

However from my limited initial play with it, I can see that the natural transitions could work very nicely in a piece.

About the sound, it does indeed have either close or stage mic options, although you cannot mix between them.

It has a standard NI convolution reverb, but this can be switched off (personally I would use Spaces instead). There are also EQ options.

The only thing it lacks is the ability to save your own presets (though many Kontakt instruments seem to lack this, perhaps its too hard to script).


----------



## Daniel James (Feb 26, 2015)

procreative @ Thu Feb 26 said:


> After a few questions to the company director, I decided to take the plunge.
> 
> First impressions?
> 
> ...



Change the name of the patch then go file save patach as in kontakt. Should save it in the menu bar for you 

-DJ


----------



## procreative (Feb 26, 2015)

Yes I thought of that one, buts its not as elegant as presets in the patch. Especially when you are experimenting!


----------



## Syncopator (Mar 12, 2016)

Vision said:


> Hey Thanks.. nope  neither of those. Interesting. Any other guesses?


Hey, man. I've scanned all 6 pages of this thread, but as far as I can tell, you never actually revealed which VI you used. What was it??


----------



## Vision (Mar 12, 2016)

Syncopator said:


> Hey, man. I've scanned all 6 pages of this thread, but as far as I can tell, you never actually revealed which VI you used. What was it??



VSL violin and viola chamber strings layered, with some sound tweaking of the patches.


----------



## Syncopator (Mar 12, 2016)

Vision said:


> VSL violin and viola chamber strings layered, with some sound tweaking of the patches.


Awesome. Thanks!


----------

