# SF Studio Strings V CSS??? - Opinions



## Callum Hoskin (Aug 30, 2018)

*SF Studio Strings V CSS??? - Opinions*
A question that needs discussing!!!


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (Aug 30, 2018)

Callum Hoskin said:


> *SF Studio Strings V CSS??? - Opinions*
> A question that needs discussing!!!



omg.dude..chill..:D


----------



## N.Caffrey (Aug 30, 2018)

a better comparison would be vs LASS


----------



## jononotbono (Aug 30, 2018)

Or maybe a comparison at least "1 hr" after it's been released? haha!


----------



## Zhao Shen (Aug 30, 2018)

The first time I'll be able to say that it's a hard choice between CSS and another library, because while CSS has been top-of-line in everything that it does, the strengths of Spitfire Studio Strings are so different, and Spitfire has offered it at a very generous price point.

I will say though, don't be misled by the "studio strings" branding that they have in common, Spitfire Studio Strings is no more similar to CSS than any of their other offerings. I was actually a little disappointed that it sounds so much like every other string library they've released.

But by god, the section size variety is phenomenal. Legato options are lacking, but made up for with the amount of articulations and section sizes. I will definitely be keeping an eye out for the brass and woodwinds - interested in how they approach those.


----------



## Consona (Aug 30, 2018)

Ha, interesting. But I'm still waiting for Hyperion Elements. When I'm spending on a new library these days, I expect very good dynamic range, great legato, a good amount of unusual articulations, etc. Seems like Hyperion will bring even more to the table than SStS. SoundIron promises stuff like sul pont shorts, which I really want, which even SStS Professional doesn't have. Curious how will these two libs compare.


----------



## sostenuto (Aug 30, 2018)

N.Caffrey said:


> a better comparison would be vs LASS



Direct shot across LASS' bow …. divisi and more for $399. ?? Has turned my head at critical time.


----------



## NoamL (Aug 30, 2018)

This is a direct CSS competitor. There's 30 musicians here, compared to 35 in CSS (and 28 in Berlin). The intro price is also exactly the same as CSS's price so... y'know... doesn't seem like coincidence... 

Except, on the other hand, you get so much more than CSS at the same price. Six mic positions instead of three, extended techniques, true sordinos, sul tasto and sul pont, trills beyond half/whole.

The size flexibility is _killer_. You have a 30-piece string orchestra with divisi in every section (except basses). You have two choices for 17-piece ensembles, which competes with SCS and Light&Sound (and the upcoming Hyperion I suppose). And you can combine the half and full size sections to get a 60 piece orchestra that weighs in with Hollywood Strings, Spitfire Symphonic Strings, and LASS. So while sticking with the studio sound, it competes in the chamber sized, studio sized and Hollywood sized arenas. What really made my day is seeing that Spitfire have prepared NKIs at each section size that already "bake together" the sample content. You don't have to load 3 sets of patches to get the divisi+divisi+full sound. That is a huge usability feature & RAM saver.

Except except, on the other _other_ hand... the longs seem to have 3 dynamic layers (4 in CSS), there are only 2 lengths of short notes (4 in CSS), and there's only one set of legato transitions (quite fast) plus portamento (3+port in CSS). And overall, the sound seems more reserved while CSS feels "musical" in every note. I skimmed through the videos and demos and nothing about this string sound really blew me away the way I remember first hearing the CSS demos (and when I use them every day!  ). It's more like Spitfire's other libraries: very neutral, and therefore very usable and flexible.

I think this is gonna be an interesting addition to all the options for strings. Looking forward to user reviews!

Looking beyond that - if it's not totally silly to do so on the day a library drops - this is Spitfire announcing that they're throwing their hat into the ring for another full orchestra.

That means in addition to upcoming dry woodwind and brass ensembles from Cinematic Studio and Soundiron Hyperion (and probably Adventure Woodwinds to complete Musical Sampling's range), there will be a Spitfire Studio option as well. Spitfire Studio Woodwinds will be particularly interesting because in their BML range they showed an interest in sampling the rarer auxiliary winds. I got the opportunity to play with the Bass Flute instrument on a friend's composing rig, and it's a stellar instrument. So Spitfire Studio Winds will be one to watch out for, I think. Heckelphone, Christian? Please?


----------



## Casiquire (Aug 30, 2018)

This is the first Spitfire library to really interest me. I'm quite tempted by this!


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (Aug 30, 2018)

NoamL said:


> This is a direct CSS competitor. There's 30 musicians here, compared to 35 in CSS (and 28 in Berlin). The intro price is also exactly the same as CSS's price so... y'know... doesn't seem like coincidence...
> 
> Except, on the other hand, you get so much more than CSS at the same price. Six mic positions instead of three, extended techniques, true sordinos, sul tasto and sul pont, trills beyond half/whole.
> 
> ...



"And overall, the sound seems more reserved while CSS feels "musical" in every note. I skimmed through the videos and demos and nothing about this string sound really blew me away the way I remember first hearing the CSS demos (and when I use them every day!  )

Yepp..same to me..samples are well recorded but doesn´t make alone an outstanding library. Don´t get me wrong the possibilities are on the paper great but in the end what matters (at least for me) is if that library can pull off musical lines...lets see..


----------



## Consona (Aug 30, 2018)

The Kontakt editing for this lib is locked.  (As is for CSS if I remember correctly.)


----------



## Consona (Aug 30, 2018)

I like the top end is not missing like with CSS, but at the same time SStS feels somewhat cold.


----------



## Henu (Aug 30, 2018)

Having been struggling with different string libraries for the last three days with each of them having some annoying drawbacks and wishing I had a DRY Spitfire library with the versatility to go from smaller sound to a bigger one, this isn't really helping. :/


----------



## Karma (Aug 30, 2018)

Consona said:


> The Kontakt editing for this lib is locked.  (As is for CSS if I remember correctly.)


Only on the patches that feature legato. Our legatos are always locked though!


----------



## markrosoft (Aug 30, 2018)

I'm very excited about this. 

Definitely going to be buying this one. The big question for me is how nice the legatos feel while playing them. Ultimately that seems to be THE thing that makes me love a library or not. And for that reason, I just find that LASS works best for me in most situations - the legatos sound good and feel good to play. I also love the divisi and the dryness. This hopefully will be a much needed newer alternative. 

Very excited to hear what people think of the playability of this! I hope those early trigger-pullers report back!


----------



## Grizzlymv (Aug 30, 2018)

Well, it is a direct compeition to CSS, but as other mentionned, I'd also say LASS as well. One of the main strenght of LASS is their divisis, which Spitfire is offering for the first time. CSS doesn't have that (I don't understand why it's not standard in most libraries, as it adds so much versatility to a library). Also, in terms of articulation LASS is going a little further than CSS if I'm not mistaken, but not as deep as Spitfire Studio Strings though. It will definitely put pressure on LASS price point though. So glad to finally see another lib properly supporting divisi.


----------



## Pablocrespo (Aug 30, 2018)

I think LASS 3 is coming sometime soon, I think I will wait to see what it brings.
Spitfire studio ww and brass are more intriguing for me now.


----------



## Eptesicus (Aug 30, 2018)

Judging from 2 out of the 3 demo tracks, definitely not SF studio strings! I actually found them hard to listen to. first demo track is lovely though so it is a bit odd.


----------



## Seycara (Aug 30, 2018)

Not throwing shade at Paul Thomson who’s done fantastic tracks in the past but his demo for the studio strings professsional really does not present the legato in a flattering light; it sounds clunky and unnatural which is strange coming from Spitfire.


----------



## Consona (Aug 30, 2018)

The price is really good, I love stuff like timestretch patches, but need to hear user demos and walkthroughs. Plus we'll get so many new string libs... So I'll definitely wait before buying this. I'm starting to get very good at this, I didn't buy anything during the recent 8dio sale. Shame it wasn't the same years ago when I burned my money on Adagio.


----------



## Eptesicus (Aug 30, 2018)

Seycara said:


> Not throwing shade at Paul Thomson who’s done fantastic tracks in the past but his demo for the studio strings professsional really does not present the legato in a flattering light; it sounds clunky and unnatural which is strange coming from Spitfire.



I hope this isn't going to be another Synchron. Have these developers forgotten how to do legato?


----------



## Parsifal666 (Aug 30, 2018)

AlexanderSchiborr said:


> omg.dude..chill..:D



It can make one nervous, right? Wow. (cracking up)

I have to admit, a dry library from Spitfire might be even more tempting than Hein.

The baked in reverb thing was my main gripe against many of the SF products. This is indeed a new frontier. I can't help but experience the GAS-iest affliction right now.


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (Aug 30, 2018)

Eptesicus said:


> I hope this isn't going to be another Synchron. Have these developers forgotten how to do legato?



Imo most of them dont think about how to make libraries so that the user has an efficient workflow. What do you have from millions of articulations when you can´t connect them to a cohesive musical line. Sometimes I think this whole puzzle box of quadrillions of articulations are nice to play around but once you mock up something with musical intention most of that falls apart sorry to say but I speak of ..my daily experience working with all this libraries.. I wish in general developers would concentrate on fewer articulation but useable content and more in depth scripting so that you are able to make some music with it and not just a collection of samples in a row. But thats not a spitfire specific thing. But watching at the walkthough this one makes no exception in that regards too.


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (Aug 30, 2018)

Parsifal666 said:


> It can make one nervous, right? Wow. (cracking up)
> 
> I have to admit, a dry library from Spitfire might be even more tempting than Hein.
> 
> The baked in reverb thing was my main gripe against many of the SF products. This is indeed a new frontier. I can't help but experience the GAS-iest affliction right now.



Room sounds nice, dry library, pretty cool. Definitely.


----------



## Parsifal666 (Aug 30, 2018)

There's also such a thing as _over-articulating_. A good self-test is to see how _few_ articulations you can get away with for a specific composition. 

I've written things where there was sul tasto, sul pont, Bartok, eight different kinds of shorts...you name it I threw it all in there. At some point I realized there were more articulations than good composition there lol!


----------



## axb312 (Aug 30, 2018)

Two areas where SF studio strings clearly has the advantage is in terms of flexibility and extended articulations. I believe this could go all the way from a quartet like feel to a huge ensemble feel. Pretty insane.

The legato though doesn't sound as good as CSS yet. 

Perhaps this could make a good layer library?


----------



## sostenuto (Aug 30, 2018)

Youse experienced, talented, creative wizards …. (seriously) pull this back to 'reality' so quickly … 

LASS and CSS were sooo tempting, but with my diminished skills, those String choices quickly tossed me into even more challenging research with Brass and Woodwinds. Especially not having necessary abilities to sort how well disparate Libs can work together. This inherently brought String choices back to SFA, OT, VSL. 

SStS seems so exciting for my needs, but with miniscule exposure this morning. Now defused slightly and will read, watch and learn for a few days . 

Really appreciate the amazing perspectives and education.


----------



## axb312 (Aug 30, 2018)

Something is very off about Demos 2 and 3....


----------



## Eptesicus (Aug 30, 2018)

axb312 said:


> Something is very off about Demos 2 and 3....



Yeh, i actually genuinely found them difficult to listen to. They are actually quite horrible ( not compositionally, sound wise).

I will definitely be waiting on more demos and user demos (demonstrations of the legato etc) before even considering this.


----------



## prodigalson (Aug 30, 2018)

axb312 said:


> Something is very off about Demos 2 and 3....



Personally, I feel it's an over enthusiastic use of dynamics. The dynamic jumps are very aggressive in both demos.


----------



## Simon Ravn (Aug 30, 2018)

CSS sounds much warmer, more "romantic", based on the walkthroughs posted.... And the legato is pretty impeccable, as is the programming in general. Unfortunately Spitfire Audio's libraries often tend to have sloppy programming with a lot of release samples too loud, legatos sounding weird and such. The initial demos don't sound too convincing either, especially the long notes... Never thought I would say that about an SF library but... they sound borderline synthy. And especially the cellos have that nasal sounding tendency.

On the other hand Spitfire Studio Strings has a ton of additional articulations that I am sure will come in handy.

But I still am 99% sure CSS is still a much more playable library that just works right out of the box with a great sound. It is a little muffled, so you don't get that super bright sound, but some EQ can get you some of the way.


----------



## muk (Aug 30, 2018)

Interesting concept, good price - but I don't really like the sound. Equipped with VSL Dimension Strings and Cinematic Studio Strings I hear nothing in these first demos that would make me buy.


----------



## Eptesicus (Aug 30, 2018)

muk said:


> Interesting concept, good price - but I don't really like the sound. Equipped with VSL Dimension Strings and Cinematic Studio Strings I hear nothing in these first demos that would make me buy.



Yeh, i think they have got the price right here. Seems fair for what you get.


----------



## Leo (Aug 30, 2018)

strange times, VSL going wet and Spitfire dry...


----------



## sostenuto (Aug 30, 2018)

NoamL said:


> This is a direct CSS competitor. There's 30 musicians here, compared to 35 in CSS (and 28 in Berlin). The intro price is also exactly the same as CSS's price so... y'know... doesn't seem like coincidence...  *****
> 
> Except, on the other hand, you get so much more than CSS at the same price. Six mic positions instead of three, extended techniques, true sordinos, sul tasto and sul pont, trills beyond half/whole. ****



Nice detailed comments, but my current ignorance makes me puzzled by CSS ~34GB and SStS Pro ~210GB.
Mics typically raise this number notably, but you mention the Mic info ….


----------



## Eptesicus (Aug 30, 2018)

sostenuto said:


> Nice detailed comments, but my current ignorance makes me puzzled by CSS ~34GB and SStS Pro ~210GB.
> Mics typically raise this number notably, but you mention the Mic info ….



presumably a large part is because of the divisi sections + extra full/large sections.


----------



## sostenuto (Aug 30, 2018)

Eptesicus said:


> presumably a large part is because of the divisi sections + extra full/large sections.



THX. So do these sections not add notably to the new SStS when compared to CSS ?


----------



## axb312 (Aug 30, 2018)

sostenuto said:


> Nice detailed comments, but my current ignorance makes me puzzled by CSS ~34GB and SStS Pro ~210GB.
> Mics typically raise this number notably, but you mention the Mic info ….



I often look into the numbers myself when buying libraries, but judging by the sounds I'm hearing so far and the fact that I own CSS - I feel pretty confident in saying the numbers don't matter in this comparison.

CSS is beautiful to play and hear. Only a bit painful with the start delay.


----------



## MisteR (Aug 30, 2018)

Eptesicus said:


> presumably a large part is because of the divisi sections + extra full/large sections.


Multiplied by twice as many mic positions and mixes (2 v 1).


----------



## storyteller (Aug 30, 2018)

I’m surprised this comparison is being made versus the much more obvious 8dio Century Strings (6,4,5,4,4). Not only are they both recorded straight away versus in situ, but there is another missing piece of the Spitfire marketing... and I can only assume this happens because of what I am about to say. The midi transpose-pitch shift trick can give you a potential 18,12,15,8,8 section with two “artificial” sections with 8dio Centurty Strings. You can tailor ADSR to better fake the product. And it is quite convincing! You can get the same results with any smaller sized library recorded straight away. So unless specified, I’d bet this is is how this was recorded. However the marketing would allude otherwise. It is probably just packaged so the user doesn’t have to do this trick manually. I absolutely love Spitfire, so this is not a negative hit on them. This is just something I wanted to point that is possibly getting overlooked. I might be entirely off base on it though! If so, I apologize to Christian & Co. I’m a big Spitfire fan. This library included.

But mostly, I don’t see why CSS would be the point of comparison. Good days to be a composer though! That’s for sure!


----------



## markrosoft (Aug 30, 2018)

yeah, listening to the walkthroughs and the demos I agree with not loving the sound. To me, it seems to lack any softness what-so-ever... like it's always kinda cranked to 10. Will be interested what people think when they actually get their hands on it...


----------



## axb312 (Aug 30, 2018)

sostenuto said:


> Nice detailed comments, but my current ignorance makes me puzzled by CSS ~34GB and SStS Pro ~210GB.
> Mics typically raise this number notably, but you mention the Mic info ….



Perhaps this explains it a bit:
SF Studio Strings
210 GB
12 Mics (6 mics x 2 mixes)
10 instruments (different sizes)

GB/ Mic/ Instrument = 1.76

Cinematic Studio Strings
34 GB
3 Mics
5 instruments

GB/ Mic/ Instrument = 2.26


Or maybe this is just junk math...


----------



## brenneisen (Aug 30, 2018)

storyteller said:


> I’d bet this is is how this was recorded. However the marketing would allude otherwise.



that's some assumption


----------



## Karma (Aug 30, 2018)

storyteller said:


> I’m surprised this comparison is being made versus the much more obvious 8dio Century Strings (6,4,5,4,4). Not only are they both recorded straight away versus in situ, but there is another missing piece of the Spitfire marketing... and I can only assume this happens because of what I am about to say. The midi transpose-pitch shift trick can give you a potential 18,12,15,8,8 section with two “artificial” sections with 8dio Centurty Strings. You can tailor ADSR to better fake the product. And it is quite convincing! You can get the same results with any smaller sized library recorded straight away. So unless specified, I’d bet this is is how this was recorded. However the marketing would allude otherwise. It is probably just packaged so the user doesn’t have to do this trick manually. I absolutely love Spitfire, so this is not a negative hit on them. This is just something I wanted to point that is possibly getting overlooked. I might be entirely off base on it though! If so, I apologize to Christian & Co. I’m a big Spitfire fan. This library included.
> 
> But mostly, I don’t see why CSS would be the point of comparison. Good days to be a composer though! That’s for sure!


To clarify,

- Main String Section of (8,6,6,6,4)
- Two Divisi Sections (4.3.3.3) We have also included divisi or half sections for the first time to give a new level of modular control
- Large band (16.12.12.12.4) Consisting of the _Main Section _and the two _Divisi Sections
_
No transpose trickery involved.


----------



## jononotbono (Aug 30, 2018)

NoamL said:


> This is a direct CSS competitor. There's 30 musicians here, compared to 35 in CSS (and 28 in Berlin). The intro price is also exactly the same as CSS's price so... y'know... doesn't seem like coincidence...
> 
> Except, on the other hand, you get so much more than CSS at the same price. Six mic positions instead of three, extended techniques, true sordinos, sul tasto and sul pont, trills beyond half/whole.
> 
> ...



Great post man. Thanks.


----------



## storyteller (Aug 30, 2018)

Karma said:


> To clarify,
> 
> - Main String Section of (8,6,6,6,4)
> - Two Divisi Sections (4.3.3.3) We have also included divisi or half sections for the first time to give a new level of modular control
> ...


Ah. Thanks for clarifying. The pics do show a recording of the full section, so I missed that too. Pretty cool.


----------



## sostenuto (Aug 30, 2018)

axb312 said:


> Perhaps this explains it a bit:
> SF Studio Strings
> 210 GB;12 Mics (6 mics x 2 mixes); 10 instruments (different sizes)
> GB/ Mic/ Instrument = 1.76
> ...



Math is solid. Went back and _re-read_ @ NaomL Post #8 (more carefully) and all is well.

THX


----------



## Batrawi (Aug 30, 2018)

none....you should at least wait for 8dio's intimate strings that should be coming out soon.

Apparently this is the dawn of studio strings libraries so I wouldn't rush for spitfire's now until I see what the other developers are up to.


----------



## RandomComposer (Aug 30, 2018)

Rather than comparing, I'm more interested in the possibility of layering it with CSS, would it be worth getting this just to be able to layer the 2 if I already have CSS/CSSS?


----------



## Michael Stibor (Aug 30, 2018)

I know everyone around here loves CSS. In fact, I bought it mostly based on reputation, and remains my core string library. Having said that I don't think it's as wonderful as everyone makes it out to be. It's still a little too "roomy" for my tastes, a little too 'big', and a little too dark. But I can't argue value for money, and I like supporting the little guy.
Having said that, I bought Spitfire's BHCT, and love the sound of it. Perfect combination of not being too dry or too wet. So I'm happy that Spitfire has released this product, it'll be the first one (other than BHCT) that I've ever even considered getting from them.
As a side note, Alex better put a move on Cinematic Studio Brass or Spitfire may steal their thunder with_ their_ studio brass library very soon!


----------



## NoamL (Aug 30, 2018)

AlexanderSchiborr said:


> Imo most of them dont think about how to make libraries so that the user has an efficient workflow. What do you have from millions of articulations when you can´t connect them to a cohesive musical line. Sometimes I think this whole puzzle box of quadrillions of articulations are nice to play around but once you mock up something with musical intention most of that falls apart sorry to say but I speak of ..my daily experience working with all this libraries.. I wish in general developers would concentrate on fewer articulation but useable content and more in depth scripting so that you are able to make some music with it and not just a collection of samples in a row. But thats not a spitfire specific thing. But watching at the walkthough this one makes no exception in that regards too.



Agreed 100% Alexander

A lot of these libraries severely restrain the writer. You can write endless spiccato ostinatos and they work, or you can write endless beautiful legato passages and they work, but when you try to combine shorts and longs it feels fake. In that regard CSS and Adventure Strings are two of the least problematic libraries I've heard. The developers clearly beta tested alternating between shorts and longs and recorded samples that would match up _reasonably_ well - still very early days compared to the real thing of course. The 4 short types in CSS helps immensely.

Hollywood Strings and the Chris Hein libraries also have a large variety of short lengths and long attack types. I remember the CH violins did very well in a recent blind test here on VIC. I tried HWS as part of Composer Cloud and thought the mix-and-matching worked less well than in CSS; but HWS has lots of other features.

Leaving out specialty techniques like pizzicato, sul tasto, con sord, tremolo, etc. string players don't consider their playing in terms of "articulations" - we think about _phrasing _and _bowing. _Staccato is not a type of articulation, it's a type of bowing. Between that and flowing legato are nearly infinite variations - detache, martele, "big bows," etc. The possibilities are as wide as the human voice. So the more articulations the better.


----------



## NoamL (Aug 30, 2018)

RandomComposer said:


> Rather than comparing, I'm more interested in the possibility of layering it with CSS, would it be worth getting this just to be able to layer the 2 if I already have CSS/CSSS?



Doesn't seem to achieve anything since they're the same size. I guess maybe it helps brighten CSS since, as everyone has said, SStS is REALLY bright especially on that Close1 mic.

I really like layering Spitfire Symphonic Strings with CSS though. This mix:

CSS Close
SSS Leader
CSS Main
SSS Tree
CSS Room
SSS Ambient
SSS Gallery

has really been working for me recently. You get the detailed legato of CSS plus the ambience of AIR. You could also switch CSS Room with SSS Outrigger if you want.


----------



## Parsifal666 (Aug 30, 2018)

NoamL said:


> Agreed 100% Alexander
> 
> Hollywood Strings and the Chris Hein libraries also have a large variety of short lengths and long attack types. I remember the CH violins did very well in a recent blind test here on VIC.



As most people here know and are sick of hearing about, I love those libraries. The Hein violin is the only one I use anymore (I almost always add QL Spaces to it, they make a terrific couple imo).

I am curious if there's a poll here somewhere asking members how many string libraries they already own. I already lost count. 

Also does anyone here buy ALL the new Spitfire projects? I'd find that pretty amazing, personally.


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Aug 30, 2018)

It sounds great on paper. And from a pricing perspective, they're finally doing it right. Not quite sold on the sound yet. Also, not yet sure how much I could do with it that isn't already covered by SCS (minus divisi, which I never cared about).


----------



## Michael Stibor (Aug 30, 2018)

markrosoft said:


> yeah, listening to the walkthroughs and the demos I agree with not loving the sound. To me, it seems to lack any softness what-so-ever... like it's always kinda cranked to 10. Will be interested what people think when they actually get their hands on it...


I guess it depends on what demo you're listening too. I agree that the audio demos aren't really to my liking on the website, but I watched the Spitfire girl's video (sorry can't remember her name) and I thought that it sounded really good. And very intimate.


----------



## Hanu_H (Aug 30, 2018)

I really don't like the Spitfire's interface and I am not a fan of all of those special articulations. I think it would have been better to focus on the core articulations and make them great and usable first and maybe add an extension for the special articulations. Price is definitely better than with the previous Spitfire libs, but I am not really convinced about the sound and the quality. I think LASS still sounds better than this, especially violins sound weird and nasal to me.

-Hannes


----------



## Mr. Ha (Aug 30, 2018)

I am a big fan of Spitfire's libraries (in fact my whole orchestra is Spitfire samples) but I would prefer if they did a few more classical sounding symphonic demos on their websites. Now they usually do minimalist, layering, very modern sounding demos. When releasing an orchestral library they should always have some classical demo piece so that we can hear the legatos in action and the phrasing etc.


----------



## NoamL (Aug 30, 2018)

Mr. Ha said:


> I am a big fan of Spitfire's libraries (in fact my whole orchestra is Spitfire samples) but I would prefer if they did a few more classical sounding symphonic demos on their websites. Now they usually do minimalist, layering, very modern sounding demos. When releasing an orchestral library they should always have some classical demo piece so that we can hear the legatos in action and the phrasing etc.



Between the demos for this, HZS and "British Drama Toolkit" I get a sense that they are consciously targeting a particular style of music and if you write that kind of music, these VIs are designed to be your ultimate tools. And that kind of music isn't classical reproductions or "traditional" writing. It's not the Remote Control style of writing either (tho let's not open that can of worms again). It's what you could call "contemporary" maybe. "British Drama" is pretty close to the mark! All the scores for prestige TV shows that get imported here to the States have that kind of writing.

Fair play to them, I mean, it's where the industry is... people are writing a lot of footballs for big strings, and little "activity" pieces for studio strings.

The whole point of all the "evolving" libraries was "Yes, keep writing footballs, but now look, the notes evolve!" 

And now they are moving beyond that to libraries like HZS and SStS.

Incidentally one great thing about them as a company is: look how many GB of samples they're churning out every year. This library alone is a fifth of a terabyte and it wasn't even their biggest or last library of 2018. We've still possibly got the choir coming before New Years (cross fingers!).


----------



## Pixelpoet1985 (Aug 30, 2018)

I simply can't understand why the divisi sections only have the basic articulations. Makes no sense offering them, isn't it? 

I don't have any Spitfire products, but the drier recordings and the price are very tempting. I prefer and stay with LASS. For me, a better sound and the same articulations for all of the divisi groups.


----------



## sostenuto (Aug 30, 2018)

Pixelpoet1985 said:


> I simply can't understand why the divisi sections only have the basic articulations. Makes no sense offering them, isn't it?
> I don't have any Spitfire products, but the drier recordings and the price are very tempting. I prefer and stay with LASS. For me, a better sound and the same articulations for all of the divisi groups.



LASS almost always come back around in these discussions …… It seems SF is now splitting the sheet in terms of AIR Lyndhurst and Studio One. No criticism or critique, but have now spent waaaay more than enough time and effort before committing to a main orchestral Strings library.
LASS Lite Bundle will cost almost as much as new SStS, and then another ~$400. to LASS 2.5 Full. 

Even after many months of this, I know, for sure, whichever I choose will be the shites …..


----------



## Xilef (Aug 30, 2018)

I seem to like this new library although I don't know what string library to purchase now :D there are soo many good libs out there today.. which really is a great thing.

And I like that they are doing modern demos. I mean it's like the Spitfire sound and they should continue that direction imo. You have other libraries for the more classical playability.


----------



## Hanu_H (Aug 30, 2018)

Pixelpoet1985 said:


> I simply can't understand why the divisi sections only have the basic articulations. Makes no sense offering them, isn't it?
> 
> I don't have any Spitfire products, but the drier recordings and the price are very tempting. I prefer and stay with LASS. For me, a better sound and the same articulations for all of the divisi groups.


Yeah, it's pretty amazing that a library done almost 10 years ago can still hold it's own this well. When LASS was introduced it really was revolutionary and the version 2 made it even better. I am sure LASS 3 will be great. And by the way...where is my LASW and LASB Audiobro??? 

-Hannes


----------



## Silence-is-Golden (Aug 30, 2018)

NoamL said:


> I really like layering Spitfire Symphonic Strings with CSS though. This mix:


How do you deal with overcoming the difference in response (mainly) to cc1 dynamics.
CSS especialy rising from p up into mf which happens in the lower ranges of cc1 needs careful adjustments , whilst SCS ( which I have, not SSS) has a different response to cc1.
Long question short: doesn’t it create double the work layering? 
Or have you also done some scripting magic in your Thane ( or what is the name currently??) that conpensates for this?
I.o.w. Just one cc1 ride that covers both cc curves well for each lib?


----------



## Silence-is-Golden (Aug 30, 2018)

Hanu_H said:


> And by the way...where is my LASW and LASB Audiobro???


I don’t expect this anymore ....not in this lifetime.....


......and I am not old ;D


----------



## NoamL (Aug 30, 2018)

Silence-is-Golden said:


> I.o.w. Just one cc1 ride that covers both cc curves well for each lib?



yes 

also the code reads incoming velocity and uses it to move the speed controller for Mural so that it keeps pace with the different speed legatos of CSS.


----------



## sostenuto (Aug 30, 2018)

Silence-is-Golden said:


> I don’t expect this anymore ....not in this lifetime.....
> 
> 
> ......and I am not old ;D



I'm probably older than Andrew, and surely you are correct … 

I still hold out hope tho for LASS Full 3 and trust that it will be a benchmark Strings Lib.
If Cinesamples Brass & WW doesn't fulfill that need, then so be it …...


----------



## yhomas (Aug 30, 2018)

axb312 said:


> Perhaps this explains it a bit:
> SF Studio Strings
> 210 GB
> 12 Mics (6 mics x 2 mixes)
> ...



This is junk. The number of SF "microphones" should be 8 (a "mix" is equivalent to a microphone), the number of "instruments" should be 17. However, there are a lot fewer articulations in some "instruments" (divis and large band have just a few), so effectively the plausibly representative number of instruments (for comparison purposes) is significantly greater than 5, but significantly less than 17.

I think it's fairly reasonable to reject the premise of GB/mic/instrument as an index of quality in any case.


----------



## kavinsky (Aug 30, 2018)

I have to say after listening to all the demos and walkthroughs, I'm definitely skipping this one.
Feels kinda lifeless to me. Not a big fan of the sound and the way it was performed.
It still has that spitfire imprint to it. Just a taste thing I guess


----------



## jaketanner (Aug 30, 2018)

NoamL said:


> This is a direct CSS competitor. There's 30 musicians here, compared to 35 in CSS (and 28 in Berlin). The intro price is also exactly the same as CSS's price so... y'know... doesn't seem like coincidence...
> 
> 
> The size flexibility is _killer_. You have a 30-piece string orchestra with divisi in every section (except basses). You have two choices for 17-piece ensembles, which competes with SCS and Light&Sound (and the upcoming Hyperion I suppose). And you can combine the half and full size sections to get a 60 piece orchestra that weighs in with Hollywood Strings, Spitfire Symphonic Strings, and LASS. So while sticking with the studio sound, it competes in the chamber sized, studio sized and Hollywood sized arenas. What really made my day is seeing that Spitfire have prepared NKIs at each section size that already "bake together" the sample content. You don't have to load 3 sets of patches to get the divisi+divisi+full sound. That is a huge usability feature & RAM saver.



I don't think adding strings together creates the lush sound of a large orchestra playing at the same time. The sections were recorded separately. it might sound bigger, but you don't get that blur and smoothness...it's the same sound just louder which is not real.


----------



## Ermac (Aug 30, 2018)

I wanted to love Spitfire Strings as I'm looking for my future go-to strings library but... something sounds wrong here. Some presets sound sonically completely different to me, the violins aren't pretty at all in the upper register, and I didn't feel any real power or emotion while listening to the demos. Maybe some new demos will help ? We'll see...


----------



## muziksculp (Aug 30, 2018)

Ermac said:


> I wanted to love Spitfire Strings as I'm looking for my future go-to strings library but... something sounds wrong here. Some presets sound sonically completely different to me, the violins aren't pretty at all in the upper register, and I didn't feel any real power or emotion while listening to the demos. Maybe some new demos will help ? We'll see...



You can always consider Spitfire Chamber Strings With Expanded Mics, or Orch. Tools Berlin Strings.


----------



## muziksculp (Aug 30, 2018)

I'm not impressed by the current demos of SstS , maybe more demos will help decide if they are really good. I love the sound of Spitfire Chamber Strings, and OT's Berlin Strings, Cinematic Studio Strings, also 8Dio's Century Strings sound great.


----------



## Casiquire (Aug 30, 2018)

Wait the divisis don't have the same sweet if articulations? No wonder the price was so low. I guess never mind.


----------



## SoNowWhat? (Aug 30, 2018)

So, has anyone posted a mock-up of The Robber yet?

(Apologies for being flippant @Christof , I love your piece and given the debate between SStS and CSS I thought it was the obvious question to ask).


----------



## SoNowWhat? (Aug 30, 2018)

muziksculp said:


> You can always consider Spitfire Chamber Strings With Expanded Mics, or Orch. Tools Berlin Strings.


Are the expanded mics still available? I thought they were out of commission til Pro series is released, probably 2019.
edit - Just looked at SF site and says they were removed from sale on 23 August.


----------



## The Darris (Aug 30, 2018)

Silence-is-Golden said:


> How do you deal with overcoming the difference in response (mainly) to cc1 dynamics.
> CSS especialy rising from p up into mf which happens in the lower ranges of cc1 needs careful adjustments , whilst SCS ( which I have, not SSS) has a different response to cc1.
> Long question short: doesn’t it create double the work layering?
> Or have you also done some scripting magic in your Thane ( or what is the name currently??) that conpensates for this?
> I.o.w. Just one cc1 ride that covers both cc curves well for each lib?


Yes, layering isn't meant to just be a simple copy and paste from one to another. This only works if the libraries in question were designed to do so (ie; Cinematic Studio Strings with Cinematic Strings 2). Each developer does their own thing. 

You could adjust the CC curve from one library to match another but that will take some patience and a lot of testing. @NoamL created a thread that covers this process but applying it to Berlin Brass's inconsistencies with how dynamics are mapped between the individual instruments. You can read that here. 

In terms of layering, if you are already proficient on editing/programming midi data in your DAW of choice, it doesn't take too much time to copy and paste from one library and re-edit/program the midi data on the layering library of choice. I do this all the time.


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Aug 30, 2018)

SoNowWhat? said:


> So, has anyone posted a mock-up of The Robber yet?
> 
> (Apologies for being flippant @Christof , I love your piece and given the debate between SStS and CSS I thought it was the obvious question to ask).



I heard "The Robber" on TV some time ago and thought: man, there's no escaping this guy!


----------



## Silence-is-Golden (Aug 30, 2018)

NoamL said:


> yes
> 
> also the code reads incoming velocity and uses it to move the speed controller for Mural so that it keeps pace with the different speed legatos of CSS.


Impressive work.

And you are still considering selling it?
Or is that a current version that you presented as donationware some time ago?

(You are building a serious piece of software for this niche market)


----------



## Silence-is-Golden (Aug 30, 2018)

The Darris said:


> In terms of layering, if you are already proficient on editing/programming midi data in your DAW of choice, it doesn't take too much time to copy and paste from one library and re-edit/program the midi data on the layering library of choice. I do this all the time.


Thanks Darris, for your post.

I don’t know where I am on the proficiency ladder benchmark :D but I do a lot of it.
My question was specifically regarding matching CSS with others, because in my experience small cc1 adjustments in the lower dynamic ranges of CSS have more effect then compared to other libs.

As of yet I have not done the layering thing mostly to keep my focus on getting to know one lib well enough, especialy in as many different musical contexts as possible( allthough I am not in the epic trailer business)


----------



## Henu (Aug 30, 2018)

SoNowWhat? said:


> Are the expanded mics still available? I thought they were out of commission til Pro series is released, probably 2019.
> edit - Just looked at SF site and says they were removed from sale on 23 August.



You can get the SCS Pro already now which is pretty much the main library + expansion.


----------



## chapbot (Aug 30, 2018)

I have a feeling many people here are listening to the new studio strings with classical ears and it's really meant more for pop music. I anticipate the timbre is really going to sit well with drums and guitars - my download just finished tonight and I'll test it out over the weekend.


----------



## Consona (Aug 30, 2018)

Pop music?







Ok.....


----------



## SoNowWhat? (Aug 30, 2018)

Henu said:


> You can get the SCS Pro already now which is pretty much the main library + expansion.


Ah, I misunderstood (or rather, I failed to actually read the post properly). I have the SCS pro, and got the expanded mics for Woodwinds which is the only other Symphonic set I have from SF. The expanded mics for the symphonics (apart from SCS pro edition) are no longer available.


----------



## Consona (Aug 30, 2018)

I was listening to the walkthrough again. The sound is rather stark. I'm surprised this was recorded in the same studio as Herrmann Toolkit. I want to hear it with some softening EQ and nice reverb. Plus I want to hear legato playing runs and stuff.


----------



## Consona (Aug 30, 2018)

The library really feels like something made for modern scandinavian TV drama rather than concert or classical music or whatever.


----------



## SoNowWhat? (Aug 30, 2018)

Consona said:


> I was listening to the walkthrough again. The sound is rather stark. I'm surprised this was recorded in the same studio as Herrmann Toolkit. I want to hear it with some softening EQ and nice reverb. Plus I want to hear legato playing runs and stuff.


It’s always the “stuff” that can really bring a Library down.


----------



## Consona (Aug 31, 2018)

Or can show how great it can handle things like that. CS2 can do pretty great playable runs and can even do that via multiple different ways, why couldn't others do that as well?


----------



## keepitsimple (Aug 31, 2018)

It's interesting how SF aimed their cannons at pretty much every single direction with this release.

- Divisi = LASS
- Number of players = CSS
- Intro price for the core version= VSL SE Strings, some 8dio libraries etc...


----------



## Vik (Aug 31, 2018)

Leo said:


> strange times, VSL going wet and Spitfire dry


Yes and no... they both know that we need both dry and wet libraries. 


sostenuto said:


> my current ignorance makes me puzzled by CSS ~34GB and SStS Pro ~210GB.


Don't forget that SF offers all those long sul tastos, true con sords, flautandos and more.


Pixelpoet1985 said:


> I simply can't understand why the divisi sections only have the basic articulations. Makes no sense offering them, isn't it?


Sable/Mural offered several paid updates (Sable 1, Sable 2 etc). Maybe we'll see the same with SStS.


Consona said:


> The library really feels like something made for modern scandinavian TV drama rather than concert or classical music or whatever.


There are other SF libs that IMO are more suitable for 'scandi'. 

I have listened to some demos and seen the comments in this thread, but I don't have the library (yet?). My initial thoughts is that it's really great that they now offer a mid sized library - with divisi and a somehow modular approach, recorded at a location as wet as Air... and that the next big thing in string libraries will be about the _tone_/about how good they are at creating the illusion that the players feel something when they play each of the notes that are being sampled.


----------



## NoamL (Aug 31, 2018)

Silence-is-Golden said:


> Impressive work.
> 
> And you are still considering selling it?
> Or is that a current version that you presented as donationware some time ago?
> ...



Will sell eventually... when it's 100% bug free! I also haven't joined the legato and spiccato modules into one big piece of code yet. I don't want to hijack the thread so let's leave it there


----------



## Pixelpoet1985 (Aug 31, 2018)

keepitsimple said:


> It's interesting how SF aimed their cannons at pretty much every single direction with this release.
> 
> - Divisi = LASS
> - Number of players = CSS
> - Intro price for the core version= VSL SE Strings, some 8dio libraries etc...



The number of divisi players are also identical to LASS (for the violins).


----------



## jamwerks (Aug 31, 2018)

I don't think eq would be of any use for the things people aren't liking. It's a broad band issue.

Whether it be Pop, Classical or other, you shouldnt be able to hear the signature (size) of the room so prominently. With SstS the early reflections are quite loud, kind of like the VSL Silent Stage recordings. With CSS, Century Strings and others, the size of the space is undistinguishable, just sounding "good".


----------



## Christof (Aug 31, 2018)

Jimmy Hellfire said:


> I heard "The Robber" on TV some time ago and thought: man, there's no escaping this guy!


Maybe it's the only piece I ever composed


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (Aug 31, 2018)

I still hope that sample devs go more into fewer articulations but with the approach of more content to create fluidity in music. I actually transcribed a bit from Williams Olympic Fanfare and this I mean, not perfect but you get the idea: fluidity and expression which is imo the most important part. Something like that for strings ensembles would be neat..

https://www.dropbox.com/s/fsqy6twgxxkedvf/JW_Olympic_Transcription_Studies_Mockup.mp3?dl=0


----------



## Consona (Aug 31, 2018)

jamwerks said:


> I don't think eq would be of any use for the things people aren't liking. It's a broad band issue.
> 
> Whether it be Pop, Classical or other, you shouldnt be able to hear the signature (size) of the room so prominently. With SstS the early reflections are quite loud, kind of like the VSL Silent Stage recordings. With CSS, Century Strings and others, the size of the space is undistinguishable, just sounding "good".


Yeah. You can eq and reverb the strings but their inherent nature won't disappear.


----------



## SoNowWhat? (Aug 31, 2018)

Consona said:


> Or can show how great it can handle things like that. CS2 can do pretty great playable runs and can even do that via multiple different ways, why couldn't others do that as well?


You are quite right. I didn’t mean to cast this new Library in a negative light or to infer it couldn’t do this. I should have approached my comment from the positive not the negative.


----------



## mozart999uk (Aug 31, 2018)

What did you guys thing of the "rocking motion" bit at 17s in the candlelight seduction section? Bit loud but sounded smoother than some of the other libraries I have....


----------



## Eptesicus (Aug 31, 2018)

Casiquire said:


> Wait the divisis don't have the same sweet if articulations? No wonder the price was so low. I guess never mind.



Wow, you are right. Seems like a rather large oversight.


----------



## MA-Simon (Aug 31, 2018)

Did not like the sound too. Unfortunally Missing Staccato shorts and again short _bowed_ repetitions (which no one EVER samples...). Definite skip for me on this one.


----------



## Consona (Aug 31, 2018)

SoNowWhat? said:


> You are quite right. I didn’t mean to cast this new Library in a negative light or to infer it couldn’t do this. I should have approached my comment from the positive not the negative.


Well I'm quite curious whether this new library can do this. There's not many libraries that can handle good sounding playable runs. Yet with CS2 you have more than one way to do them and all sound really good. Even CSS, which is a newer library from the same developer, cannot do that, interestingly enough. The fluid moving textures you can do with CS2's normal articulations thanks to the Live mode are quite amazing.


----------



## brek (Aug 31, 2018)

One potentially important distinction with LASS: no auto divisi. Unless I missed it.


----------



## thesteelydane (Aug 31, 2018)

NoamL said:


> string players don't consider their playing in terms of "articulations" - we think about _phrasing _and _bowing. _



This right here is the truth, and another reason learning to write orchestral music solely with samples is doing yourself a disservice. I know most people like to separate “shorts” and “longs” for mixing, and I always think to myself “but that’s not musical - that’s not how music and phrases work”.


----------



## Salorom (Aug 31, 2018)

In my experience, the only library that can pull realistic-ish fast legato playing is Dimension Strings, since it is so consistent while offering to program each player individually. Time consuming, but works very nicely.


----------



## Eptesicus (Aug 31, 2018)

Salorom said:


> In my experience, the only library that can pull realistic-ish fast legato playing is Dimension Strings, since it is so consistent while offering to program each player individually. Time consuming, but works very nicely.



Soaring strings can too.


----------



## SimonCharlesHanna (Aug 31, 2018)

MA-Simon said:


> Did not like the sound too. Unfortunally Missing Staccato shorts and again *short bowed repetitions (which no one EVER samples...)*. Definite skip for me on this one.


VSL use to


----------



## Salorom (Aug 31, 2018)

Eptesicus said:


> Soaring strings can too.


I don’t know this one too well. Would you mind posting an example, please?


----------



## Consona (Aug 31, 2018)

CS2 can handle fast legatos no prob even to the point of really quick Harry Potter runs.


----------



## Salorom (Aug 31, 2018)

Then I’m interested in listening to realistic examples from libraries other than Dimension Strings. I own quite a few but haven’t tried them all of course.


----------



## Rob Elliott (Aug 31, 2018)

Hanu_H said:


> Yeah, it's pretty amazing that a library done almost 10 years ago can still hold it's own this well. When LASS was introduced it really was revolutionary and the version 2 made it even better. I am sure LASS 3 will be great. And by the way...where is my LASW and LASB Audiobro???
> 
> -Hannes


Has anyone heard it LASS 3 includes all new samples (I bet they have learned so much in this regard in the last decade.) While the programming of LASS is top drawer for sure - I always struggled to get the sound just right.


----------



## Pixelpoet1985 (Aug 31, 2018)

Rob Elliott said:


> Has anyone heard it LASS 3 includes all new samples (I bet they have learned so much in this regard in the last decade.) While the programming of LASS is top drawer for sure - I always struggled to get the sound just right.


If I remember correctly, there will be new samples. There is a thread about it in the Audiobro forum.

By the way, I asked for some news on future products and the next release (maybe LASS 3?) is going to be a quote: "big one". That's the only information, they keep everything secret, which is okay.


----------



## muziksculp (Aug 31, 2018)

Looking forward to the release of LASS 3


----------



## Michael Stibor (Aug 31, 2018)

keepitsimple said:


> It's interesting how SF aimed their cannons at pretty much every single direction with this release.
> 
> - Divisi = LASS
> - Number of players = CSS
> - Intro price for the core version= VSL SE Strings, some 8dio libraries etc...


But that's a good thing right? Of course for them it's a good strategic move for Spitfire, but it's also a great way to consolidate everyone's favorite features from other libraries into one package. 
Personally I'm happy with Spitfire's aggressive approach to gaining market share even if I haven't previously been interested in their products. It's better for the consumer than those companies who shall not be named who have the "it'll come out when(if) it comes out" approach.


----------



## Rob Elliott (Aug 31, 2018)

Pixelpoet1985 said:


> If I remember correctly, there will be new samples. There is a thread about it in the Audiobro forum.
> 
> By the way, I asked for some news on future products and the next release (maybe LASS 3?) is going to be a quote: "big one". That's the only information, they keep everything secret, which is okay.


Ok - good news. They released a good product that is for sure BUT - it seemed to me they THEN spent 3 years coming up with this and that to have it 'sound' better. IMHO - it starts and stops with capturing the right sound on the initial recordings (recording techniques, room, players, etc.). For sure I am not saying it was unusable (I made my living from using it for years) - it just always took way too much time to get it to 'final' I was personally excited about.

All new samples (on lessons learned, experience, etc.) would really be wonderful. To my understanding - no one really has a similar auto Divisi GUI (after setting up to personal workflow)- apply that to NEW samples and well...………


----------



## keepitsimple (Aug 31, 2018)

mikefrommontreal said:


> But that's a good thing right? Of course for them it's a good strategic move for Spitfire, but it's also a great way to consolidate everyone's favorite features from other libraries into one package.
> Personally I'm happy with Spitfire's aggressive approach to gaining market share even if I haven't previously been interested in their products. It's better for the consumer than those companies who shall not be named who have the "it'll come out when(if) it comes out" approach.


Yup. Something else i noticed in the *core library walkthrough* is how Paul Thomson explains the meaning of "longs" and "sordinos" which i never seen him do before. Makes me think that this new library or "chapter" is also aimed at first time buyers who just want to get into the world of orchestral libraries.


----------



## jaketanner (Aug 31, 2018)

AlexanderSchiborr said:


> Imo most of them dont think about how to make libraries so that the user has an efficient workflow. What do you have from millions of articulations when you can´t connect them to a cohesive musical line. Sometimes I think this whole puzzle box of quadrillions of articulations are nice to play around but once you mock up something with musical intention most of that falls apart sorry to say but I speak of ..my daily experience working with all this libraries.. I wish in general developers would concentrate on fewer articulation but useable content and more in depth scripting so that you are able to make some music with it and not just a collection of samples in a row. But thats not a spitfire specific thing. But watching at the walkthough this one makes no exception in that regards too.



Cinesamples does just that...minimal articulations, but very usable and playable. I love the sound too...fairly raw.


----------



## SoNowWhat? (Aug 31, 2018)

keepitsimple said:


> Yup. Something else i noticed in the *core library walkthrough* is how Paul Thomson explains the meaning of "longs" and "sordinos" which i never seen him do before. Makes me think that this new library or "chapter" is also aimed at first time buyers who just want to get into the world of orchestral libraries.


And if you were starting out this wouldn’t be a bad place to start. Arguments for and against (discussed here) but I’m not sure there is a definitive answer to the “which Library to start with?” question. Of course budget, workflow, aims/goals come into that discussion too.


----------



## Old Timer (Sep 3, 2018)

If I didn't already have a ton of string libraries I might well get this but between LASS and Albion 2 I have pretty much all I need for the kind of music I write these days. I have other string libraries too, which I almost never use. I've learned to love the ones I do use and the others gather virtual dust.

How many string libraries does a person need? I could probably make do with LASS but I do like the flautando in Albion 2 and that library is great for adding a sprinkling of fairy dust quickly.

But if I was starting out on a string library quest this new dry library from Spitfire would be a hot contender. Great price too!


----------



## sostenuto (Sep 3, 2018)

Old Timer said:


> If I didn't already have a ton of string libraries I might well get this but between LASS and Albion 2 I have pretty much all I need for the kind of music I write these days. *****
> **** But if I was starting out on a string library quest this new dry library from Spitfire would be a hot contender. Great price too!



I'm feeling like a yo-yo now; having some Albions, Swarm, BDT, EDNA01. 
Also using wide-ranging goodies like BO-Inspire 1&2, The Orchestra, many Sonokinetic, x,y,z .... 

Not long ago I was borderline SF fan-boy, and then: BT Phobos, Solo Strings, now SStS. 
Not suggesting terrible work, just such increased, detailed critiques from so many capable users. 

LASS continues to receive support, in spite of aging, and this is another yank on my chain. 
No doubt SStS will receive heavy SF first-aid, yet I'm struck by your ( *@ Old Timer* _ "._.. this new dry library ……… hot contender._" )
I assume you definitely mean Professional version. 
Guess I better watch and wait a bit longer.


----------



## Hanu_H (Sep 3, 2018)

sostenuto said:


> I'm feeling like a yo-yo now; having some Albions, Swarm, BDT, EDNA01.
> Also using wide-ranging goodies like BO-Inspire 1&2, The Orchestra, many Sonokinetic, x,y,z ....
> 
> Not long ago I was borderline SF fan-boy, and then: BT Phobos, Solo Strings, now SStS.
> ...


AudioBro is totally different developer than Spitfire. They don't spit(bun intended) many libraries out in a year, but when ever they release one, it's really gone through some intensive testing. And look at how many major updates LASS has had during the years. And it was perfectly fine at the release. When looking at the pricing, I think SStS is aimed more for entry level than for professionals. I really doubt it will have many major updates. It will of course have bugfixes and other minor updates, but redoing scripting or recording new articulations is not likely gonna happen. Or if it's ever gonna happen, it's gonna cost you.

-Hannes


----------



## sostenuto (Sep 3, 2018)

Hanu_H said:


> AudioBro is totally different developer than Spitfire. They don't spit(bun intended) many libraries out in a year, but when ever they release one, it's really gone through some intensive testing. And look at how many major updates LASS has had during the years. And it was perfectly fine at the release.
> -Hannes



I have communicated with Audiobro ad nauseum (_for them I bet_). Both Andrew and Sebastian have been extraordinary with their assistance. 
I use LADD, but major hesitation with LASS 2.5 Full has always been the inherent need to then sort the best Brass and WW complementary libraries.
My limited skills make this selection more difficult than for many. CineBrass Complete is feeling quite comfortable, but WW is a challenge. 
Longtime option has been SF_SSO, but not much attention seems to be paid there in recent times. Maybe no need ?


----------



## ism (Sep 3, 2018)

thesteelydane said:


> This right here is the truth, and another reason learning to write orchestral music solely with samples is doing yourself a disservice. I know most people like to separate “shorts” and “longs” for mixing, and I always think to myself “but that’s not musical - that’s not how music and phrases work”.



Any suggestion on what is the antidote of this for non string players?


----------



## thesteelydane (Sep 3, 2018)

ism said:


> Any suggestion on what is the antidote of this for non string players?



Some good old book learning, score study, transcribtion, lessons, asking players, composing on paper....


----------



## rottoy (Sep 3, 2018)

I just program everything like synth pads and wait for Hans Zimmer to wave his magic 344-string-player-wand in my direction.


----------



## CT (Sep 3, 2018)

thesteelydane said:


> Some good old book learning, score study, transcribtion, lessons, asking players, composing on paper....



I would also add to this, for those who compose away from paper some/all of the time: play in your parts with one ideally very agile long patch. That way, you're thinking of the line as an actual continuous line, not just a mishmash of snapshotted articulations.

Then just go back and substitute in different legatos/shorts as necessary to make the phrase *sound* as natural as it was conceived.


----------



## procreative (Sep 3, 2018)

Utlimately though there are two schools of thought on composing whether for media or pleasure.

Are you trying to fool the listener or write with the aim of transcribing for a live orchestra? Or are you trying to compose music or soundbeds that convey the mood you intend whether purely for audio or to picture?

If its the latter, maybe do not get quite so fixated over whether it "sounds real" as most listeners do not listen to music that way. They react to melody, rhythm and mood. Whether that Legato transition sounds "real" falls secondary in my opinion.

The joy and curse of sample land is that because we can get close, we yearn to get closer.

For those that remember a life before samples, remember when choosing articulations (or "phrasing") how it used to be Strings Arco, Strings Slow, Strings Marcato (and before I got my JV880 in 1992 it was just "Strings")...

Just remember how good a master craftsman like Thomas Bergersen could make even Symphonic Orchestra sound, its not just the samples, its the composition, the choice of orchestration, the pace, the structure, the dynamics.

A lot of this could be done with a Casio CZ1 if its done right.

"The Orchestra" opened by eyes to how good something could sound with even mediochre samples just by varying CC or even volume.


----------



## Eptesicus (Sep 3, 2018)

procreative said:


> Utlimately though there are two schools of thought on composing whether for media or pleasure.
> 
> Are you trying to fool the listener or write with the aim of transcribing for a live orchestra? Or are you trying to compose music or soundbeds that convey the mood you intend whether purely for audio or to picture?
> 
> ...



The problem i have, is that developers are seemingly going backwards and not being innovative enough.

There are LOADS of sample companies and libraries now, all doing the same tired thing.

Take the flautando's in this new library for example. They sound quite nice on their own playing one note. As soon as they are used in an actual piece, they sound rubbish and unconnected...because, well, they are. They are just unconnected snapshots of audio which will never translate into a realistic performance.

Far, far more work needs to be done on transitions. Even if it isn't what you would consider a "legato" transition, i think _something_ has to be there for a mock up to sound as realistic as possible.

I think is the sort of thing that needs to be explored instead of churning out the same old stuff every damn time. Spitfire and VSL seem to be going backwards in this regard.


----------



## CT (Sep 3, 2018)

I wish Spitfire, and others, would implement a scripted legato for all their longs other than the real legatos, like CSS has (unless I misunderstand that feature). No, it's not the real thing, but they sound just fine in context and better than gapped notes.


----------



## SimonCharlesHanna (Sep 3, 2018)

miket said:


> I wish Spitfire, and others, would implement a scripted legato for all their longs other than the real legatos, like CSS has (unless I misunderstand that feature). No, it's not the real thing, but they sound just fine in context and better than gapped notes.


Can I add to the wishlist?
Crossfadable/cc selected bowing technique (normal, tasto, pont, trem, harmonic etc) across all articulations rather than a separate patch for each? so we can write lines and choose what the player does rather than write for single sample patches.


----------



## axb312 (Sep 3, 2018)

sostenuto said:


> I have communicated with Audiobro ad nauseum (_for them I bet_). Both Andrew and Sebastian have been extraordinary with their assistance.
> I use LADD, but major hesitation with LASS 2.5 Full has always been the inherent need to then sort the best Brass and WW complementary libraries.
> My limited skills make this selection more difficult than for many. CineBrass Complete is feeling quite comfortable, but WW is a challenge.
> Longtime option has been SF_SSO, but not much attention seems to be paid there in recent times. Maybe no need ?



I feel LASS is overpriced, even at the current prices. Looking at the GB requirements, it's not a whole lot of data they library is working with so I assume the make up a lot of that in scripting. Is/ Was programming really that expensive?

I hope they revisit the pricing strategy with LASS 3.0 and include some of the more unique articulations we've become accustomed to from Spitfire.


----------



## prodigalson (Sep 3, 2018)

axb312 said:


> I feel LASS is overpriced, even at the current prices. Looking at the GB requirements, it's not a whole lot of data they library is working with so I assume the make up a lot of that in scripting. Is/ Was programming really that expensive?
> 
> I hope they revisit the pricing strategy with LASS 3.0 and include some of the more unique articulations we've become accustomed to from Spitfire.



But price should be assessed in terms of value, not GB size and initial, tangible costs of recording alone. Time is money, as they say, and yes it takes a lot of time to come up with revolutionary scripting and programming. (something Spitfire could maybe learn from).


----------



## Consona (Sep 3, 2018)

I think @Alex W is one of the devs who cares about musicality of his libraries. Even CS2 had legato for more articulations than just sustains, the Live mode had 3 settings and worked wonders on short notes passages, a quick succession of them sounds like a real fluid performed phrase rather than your common sample library spiccati pattern. Hope he'll implement that into CSS, as well as the Run mode. Both these features are amazing and every developer should put them in their string libraries. I know Berlin has something like that. I hope Hyperion will do something similar as well.

I mean, this is a fricking staccatissimo line :

In other libraries it would sound completely disjointed. In CS2 you can choose how much blur between notes you want or just turn the blurring effect off, brilliant.


----------



## StatKsn (Sep 3, 2018)

(sorry for bring off-topic) LASS is not that huge in GB because it doesn't come with 64 microphone positions 

Pianoteq is like 10MB installed but it is arguably the best piano VI in the market.

GB is sometimes even more deceptive since you can easily inflate it by using 32bit 88khz waveforms, or deflate it by using 16bit (which is more than enough for normalized samples).


----------



## axb312 (Sep 3, 2018)

StatKsn said:


> (sorry for bring off-topic) LASS is not that huge in GB because it doesn't come with 64 microphone positions
> 
> Pianoteq is like 10MB installed but it is arguably the best piano VI in the market.
> 
> GB is sometimes even more deceptive since you can easily inflate it by using 32bit 88khz waveforms, or deflate it by using 16bit (which is more than enough for normalized samples).



This is my point. Seemingly less time spent in the Studio/ recording stage actually capturing and perfecting the samples themselves and more time spent programming. 

Not a problem. 

But programming should be much cheaper than recording (again, an assumption) and I believe Audiobro should've more than recovered these costs by now.

Anyhow, this is just my opinion and will most likely not affect the price in anyway so - back on topic?


----------



## mcpepe (Sep 4, 2018)

One question:
If CSS has a lot less Gb of samples than SF Studio Strings, does this means that CSS is less demanding for a modest computer?


----------



## Old Timer (Sep 4, 2018)

LASS is kind of expensive, although it has come down a lot since it was introduced. My feeling with LASS, and with any orchestral sample library, is that no matter how many GB they are, and how many articulations, they can only give an 'impression' of the sound you're after - especially if you're after something realistic.

I don't for a minute claim to know how to score for an orchestra. But I'm convinced that scoring even one long sustained note for an orchestra and playing it back as a sample will never sound like a long sustained note played by an orchestra as part of a composition. It just won't. Once you factor in the conductor and each player's knowledge of what has gone before and what is coming after, the live sustained note (imo) will sound more alive, more vibrant - have more intent (if that makes sense).

My own limited experience is as a guitar and ukulele player. I made a ukulele sample library for Kontakt and I would never claim that this is the same as having a ukulele in your track. At best it can give an impression. It was for this reason that I made my Kontakt instrument include pads and drums and bass derived from ukulele sounds. For me, this is the joy of sampling - making something new from sounds you have recorded, rather than going for the realism of a player.

I can see the value of orchestral samples for mock ups but they're never going to sound as 'alive' and 'organic' as a bunch of people playing live. The recent Olafur Arnalds 'in depth' video from Spitfire shows how different samples sound compared to a live band. It's for that reason that I question how many sample string libraries anyone really needs - if you are aiming at an impression, you might as well choose one or two and stick to those. If you are after a live string sound I think you'd be better spending your money on that - live strings.

I still believe that the new Studio Strings from Spitfire sounds good and looks like excellent value and, as I wrote earlier, if I had no string libraries already I would probably/possibly buy it - I could have a lot of fun with even the basic single mic set, which is amazing value. And having them dry makes them more flexible imo (which is why I like LASS).

Sorry for the long post. I took my dog Pippin for a walk this morning and this was rolling round in my head so I thought I might as well share it. Love to all, Old Timer.


----------



## StatKsn (Sep 4, 2018)

I don't value the library by GB (tbh I prefer smaller footprint if possible without compromising) but my personal way to value the library in terms of GB is to use a number divided by the number of microphone positions, then multiplied by (24/bit rate) and (48k/sampling rate).

Given LASS is 16.4GB with just one microphone position, it is a fair "GB value" compared to Spitfire Studio Strings Pro (26.2GB per mic/mix).


----------



## Hanu_H (Sep 4, 2018)

axb312 said:


> I feel LASS is overpriced, even at the current prices. Looking at the GB requirements, it's not a whole lot of data they library is working with so I assume the make up a lot of that in scripting. Is/ Was programming really that expensive?
> 
> I hope they revisit the pricing strategy with LASS 3.0 and include some of the more unique articulations we've become accustomed to from Spitfire.


LASS is definitely not overpriced. It's got after all 4 different sized divisi sections. The GB size of the library has nothing to do with value. With Spitfire, you got a lot of GB's and still it's not even sampled chromatically. And at least LASS has legato in tremolos, trills, etc. Scripting takes months or years, recordings takes only few days. And what I have seen with Spitfire, is that they mostly skip the scripting and editing. They sell libraries with a poor scripting and bad optimization but their marketing turns it into a huge library with these beatiful one shot longs. If you compare LASS and SStS, SStS is miles behind. It's outdated and poorly designed even compared to a library that is almost 10 years old. If Spitfire wants to stay in the game, they really need to hire some top notch scripters and ditch this 10 year old desing philosophy. The game is all about ease of use nowdays. A lot more has to happen under the hood if you are gonna compete with the other companies. No one wants to keyswitch or ride a lot of different CC's, everyone just wants to play and it should sound great without a lot of effort. AI is the future and I hope these kind of libraries won't be around for long.

-Hannes


----------



## MarcelM (Sep 4, 2018)

mcpepe said:


> One question:
> If CSS has a lot less Gb of samples than SF Studio Strings, does this means that CSS is less demanding for a modest computer?



no.


----------



## Nao Gam (Sep 4, 2018)

Consona said:


> I think @Alex W is one of the devs who cares about musicality of his libraries. Even CS2 had legato for more articulations than just sustains, the Live mode had 3 settings and worked wonders on short notes passages, a quick succession of them sounds like a real fluid performed phrase rather than your common sample library spiccati pattern. Hope he'll implement that into CSS, as well as the Run mode. Both these features are amazing and every developer should put them in their string libraries. I know Berlin has something like that. I hope Hyperion will do something similar as well.
> 
> I mean, this is a fricking staccatissimo line :
> 
> In other libraries it would sound completely disjointed. In CS2 you can choose how much blur between notes you want or just turn the blurring effect off, brilliant.



First I find out Jasper was involved in both musical sampling and performance samples, then Alex is good friends with him. The forefront of realistic sample performances in one spoonful! Small world


----------



## StatKsn (Sep 4, 2018)

mcpepe said:


> One question:
> If CSS has a lot less Gb of samples than SF Studio Strings, does this means that CSS is less demanding for a modest computer?



Generally, a number of dynamic layers per articulation matters the most. Hollywood Strings longs are not very big in memory footprint but the most powerful violins patch can throw your CPU to the ground, as it fires up to 13 dynamic layers at once plus release triggers (hit a triad and you are already streaming 39 samples simultaneously) - thankfully, you don't need the powerful patch all the time. OTOH, you can expect that a giant collection of single-layer one shots (like Spitfire's EVO) to be much less demanding.

Short answer is CSS is kinda demanding still due to its advanced scripting.


----------



## axb312 (Sep 4, 2018)

mcpepe said:


> One question:
> If CSS has a lot less Gb of samples than SF Studio Strings, does this means that CSS is less demanding for a modest computer?


Perhaps this explains it a bit:
SF Studio Strings
210 GB
12 Mics (6 mics x 2 mixes)
10 instruments (different sizes)

GB/ Mic/ Instrument = 1.76

Cinematic Studio Strings
34 GB
3 Mics
5 instruments

GB/ Mic/ Instrument = 2.26

LASS
22.1 GB (including sordinos)
1 Mic
5 instruments

GB/ Mic/ Instrument = 4.42


Or maybe this is just junk math...


----------



## axb312 (Sep 4, 2018)

axb312 said:


> Perhaps this explains it a bit:
> SF Studio Strings
> 210 GB
> 12 Mics (6 mics x 2 mixes)
> ...



The LASS Full + Con Sordino bundle is 700 USD or btw...on a 65% sale - tell me that's not too much?


----------



## procreative (Sep 4, 2018)

In my humble opinion taking the different ambience out of the equation, when it comes to strings, Spitfire hit their peak with Sable/SCS. Of all their orchestral libraries it has the most Legato choices, a plethora of articulations and due to its section size the most detailed vibrato sound.

But I think financially it was the most demanding and I think they over-promised.

They just don't seem to have gone into that kind of depth since, both the Solo Strings and this recent release are very lacking in the Legato department.

Personally I can do without the Bartoks, Col Legnos and Brushed Spiccatos. What I want is excellent Legato choices, a range of bowing styles such as Marcato, Staccato, Sforzando, Portato, Detache.

And why has nobody created a Legato to Staccato patch yet?


----------



## Pablocrespo (Sep 4, 2018)

procreative said:


> Personally I can do without the Bartoks, Col Legnos and Brushed Spiccatos. What I want is excellent Legato choices, a range of bowing styles such as Marcato, Staccato, Sforzando, Portato, Detache.



This! we need strings that can sing, enough with the bartok and col legnos!


----------



## star.keys (Sep 4, 2018)

Pablocrespo said:


> This! we need strings that can sing, enough with the bartok and col legnos!



Spot on. I'm tired of unnecessary set of (generally) useless articulations but the lack of useable bread & butter articulations. This is what happens when marketing takes over brains of passionate engineers. That's the reason I have started appreciating companies like Orchestral Tools more than ever before. They are consistently delivering no nonsense, high quality useable products that actually work.


----------



## IdealSequenceG (Sep 4, 2018)

procreative said:


> And why has nobody created a Legato to Staccato patch yet?



There were those samples in 'Fable Sounds - Broadway Big Band' but they too cut the attack part of the legato sample.

Apart from that, I am very sad that most library have lost the potential of the source because they have cut too much of the attack and sustain of the legato part before and after.


----------



## procreative (Sep 4, 2018)

I seem to remember CS2 had controls in the GUI to edit the Start/End points of Shorts, I don't know why more Devs don't do this, much easier than messing under the hood. Jaeger has this too.

But so many Devs are releasing the same base articulations. There should be more focus on providing ways to create flowing rhythmic parts. There is no real way to join longs to shorts or shorts, and so few Devs supply Marcato Legato, Con Sordino Legato.

Then there is the lack of options with Vibrato. Why not provide more Vibrato options like OT do, like Progressive Vibrato (maybe two timings), Molto Vibrato. Or more RRs with shorts.

There are just too many "me too" libraries without enough innovation or consistency.


----------



## Seycara (Sep 4, 2018)

Just bought the basic tree mic only edition of SStS and I gotta say, the legato is disappointing and does not stand out at all; The realism of the programming or the sampling is definitely a league below SSS and SCS (not to mention competition like CSS and BST). I honestly don't know what happened here but if your goal is to create as realistic sounding of a mockup as possible, this is a step down from Spitfire's previous libraries.

But hey, we have those amazingly useful 5th gliss slide and 3 choices of grace note fx articulations that will makeup for it


----------



## CT (Sep 4, 2018)

Hanu_H said:


> No one wants to keyswitch or ride a lot of different CC's, everyone just wants to play and it should sound great without a lot of effort.



Isn't this exactly what a lot of their previous libraries offer, and to frequent criticism by some people? 

It's no surprise developers are flipping their approaches upside down recently. Nothing seems to satisfy anyone!


----------



## Consona (Sep 4, 2018)

procreative said:


> I seem to remember CS2 had controls in the GUI to edit the Start/End points of Shorts, I don't know why more Devs don't do this, much easier than messing under the hood.


Yep, this is another great thing about CS2. I always make shorts very short and then regulate how long they are via length of the notes in the midi editor so some are longer than others even without switching articulations.


----------



## Hanu_H (Sep 4, 2018)

miket said:


> Isn't this exactly what a lot of their previous libraries offer, and to frequent criticism by some people?
> 
> It's no surprise developers are flipping their approaches upside down recently. Nothing seems to satisfy anyone!


Actually this is something that does not exist at the moment, but some developers are slowly getting there. I just think that it is a bad idea to start a new orchestral line with the same core design as many of their older libraries. And what I am hearing from the demos and user reviews, it's not even on the same level as some of their earlier libraries. I see it as an entry level library for beginners, but for someone who already has quite a good collection of string libraries, it will not do anything better than the other high end libraries.

-Hannes


----------



## StatKsn (Sep 4, 2018)

I think Spitfire is now operating more business-focused than usual VI outfits (since they have the investor now and almost feels like they have quarter-to-quarter milestones) I think it makes sense for them to release "character" libraries with basic sustains and shorts + RT as many as possible rather than taking time to develop one very meticulously programmed library. But even before that, they seemed to have a focus on relative-easy-to-do-it-right articulations like slow attack pads. Not that it is bad in any means, but explains some criticisms that Spitfire libraries are pad (Tundra is a beautiful pad library but I don't think I used more than 10% of the content).

I do feel like Spitfire is no longer in the list of high-end "pushing the limit" developers like Audiobro/Cinematic Studio Strings/Fluffy Audio/Performance Samples/Virharmonic etc. which people might expect them to be in. More like, they are a variety shop now.

tl:dr it seems like there is a discrepancy between what people likes Spitfire to be and what Spitfire is (logically) going to do.


----------



## CT (Sep 4, 2018)

Hanu_H said:


> I see it as an entry level library for beginners, but for someone who already has quite a good collection of string libraries, it will not do anything better than the other high end libraries.



I believe this is a worthwhile product for just such a purpose, though. I wish it had been available when I was starting. Entry-level libraries from Spitfire is good news for beginners. 

It certainly seems far ahead of the choices I had just a few years ago when building my collection.


----------



## Hanu_H (Sep 4, 2018)

miket said:


> I believe this is a worthwhile product for just such a purpose, though. I wish it had been available when I was starting. Entry-level libraries from Spitfire is good news for beginners.
> 
> It certainly seems far ahead of the choices I had just a few years ago when building my collection.


Yeah, I agree. It's good to have entry level libraries. But then the marketing should reflect that. Saying it's the new chapter and an incredibly versatile pro-end dry stage sample library doesn't really make justice to the product, does it? You didn't have better choices few years back? What about LASS, Sable and even Hollywood Strings?

-Hannes


----------



## CT (Sep 4, 2018)

Hanu_H said:


> Yeah, I agree. It's good to have entry level libraries. But then the marketing should reflect that. Saying it's the new chapter and an incredibly versatile pro-end dry stage sample library doesn't really make justice to the product, does it? You didn't have better choices few years back? What about LASS, Sable and even Hollywood Strings?
> 
> -Hannes



In 2012 or so, not at this price point, no.


----------



## StatKsn (Sep 4, 2018)

I see a line like "an incredible versatile pro-end dry stage library" to be just a bunch of copywriting and personally avoid reading it. I think Spitfire actually did a good job presenting the library in a honest, raw state in their walkthrough.


----------



## Hanu_H (Sep 4, 2018)

miket said:


> In 2012 or so, not at this price point, no.


Yeah, well the industry has really changed since then. Now you can have LASS Lite for $209 and that is just insane if you think about the value. When I purchased my first orchestral library EWQLSO it cost me thousands...

-Hannes


----------



## tack (Sep 4, 2018)

procreative said:


> when it comes to strings, Spitfire hit their peak with Sable/SCS. Of all their orchestral libraries it has the most Legato choices, a plethora of articulations and due to its section size the most detailed vibrato sound.


I bought the Sable bundle in 2015 for $1100 USD. And that was with a Black Friday discount (Spitfire's first, I believe) -- the original price was around $1900 USD.

Compare that to their new Studio Strings which is $399 USD. I'm sure there is some economies of scale at play here, but I have to believe the price difference reflects in the amount of investment they're putting into these products.


----------



## Consona (Sep 4, 2018)

Salorom said:


> Then I’m interested in listening to realistic examples from libraries other than Dimension Strings. I own quite a few but haven’t tried them all of course.


----------



## Casiquire (Sep 4, 2018)

axb312 said:


> I feel LASS is overpriced, even at the current prices. Looking at the GB requirements, it's not a whole lot of data they library is working with so I assume the make up a lot of that in scripting. Is/ Was programming really that expensive?
> 
> I hope they revisit the pricing strategy with LASS 3.0 and include some of the more unique articulations we've become accustomed to from Spitfire.



LASS has more sections than most string libraries except Dimension Strings and covers all major bases plus has way more under the hood than most libraries. This conversation confuses me. You literally get a feature where you can move each section on a stage similar to MIR plus you can color the library to get the impression of different films. Auto-divisi and a rhythm tool and custom keyswitches...plus the ARC where you can automate all these things across all your sections simultaneously, this library is a programming beast.



axb312 said:


> The LASS Full + Con Sordino bundle is 700 USD or btw...on a 65% sale - tell me that's not too much?



It's not. The 65% is misleading since the library hasn't sold for over a thousand in years now and you get a crossgrade price on Legato Sordino if you own Full, and the current price of LS isn't 65% off to begin with. Notice the ad says "UP TO 65%", many of the items aren't are that level of discount.


----------



## Salorom (Sep 4, 2018)

Thanks for the links Consona, although I mainly hear staccato/spiccato patches playing fast in “runs”.

What I have in mind is actual legato playing. I posted an example in a thread I conveniently named Agile legato...


----------



## Pixelpoet1985 (Sep 4, 2018)

Casiquire said:


> LASS has more sections than most string libraries except Dimension Strings and covers all major bases plus has way more under the hood than most libraries. This conversation confuses me. You literally get a feature where you can move each section on a stage similar to MIR plus you can color the library to get the impression of different films. Auto-divisi and a rhythm tool and custom keyswitches...plus the ARC where you can automate all these things across all your sections simultaneously, this library is a programming beast.



I totally agree. It's by no means overpriced, even with the sordinos in a bundle. Because you have all these great features which @Casiquire mentions. I love the Stage & Color feature. And the most important thing overlooked by many is that you actually have three (!) full divisi sections with all the same (!) articulations plus separate first chairs. So, you end up with four string libraries in one, all can be played separately. And the programming is top notch, you also can play realistic fast lines.


----------



## procreative (Sep 4, 2018)

tack said:


> I bought the Sable bundle in 2015 for $1100 USD. And that was with a Black Friday discount (Spitfire's first, I believe) -- the original price was around $1900 USD.
> 
> Compare that to their new Studio Strings which is $399 USD. I'm sure there is some economies of scale at play here, but I have to believe the price difference reflects in the amount of investment they're putting into these products.



Granted, I paid £700 (early adopter but you also got a generous 25% coupon). This is £349 intro, so half the price.

In my guesstimation the recent slips in QC seem to have co-incided with my theory that since their exponential growth, Paul and Christian probably have a less hands on control of day to day operations and command the overall business strategy and production decisions (than they used to).

I mean both live in remote rural locations, so visits to HQ are probably less frequent that in the beginning.

The cost of this package is lower, granted. But a better approach would have been to split into two volumes and make the bread and butter stuff absolutely spot on.

I would rather have a good selection of basic articulations and very good legato, than loads of esoteric ones at their expense. I mean grace notes and super sul tastos are very nice and all, but not if the core articulations suffer.

My other suspicion is that part of the reason the cost is lower is that it got shared with the BHT sessions (I could be wrong, but it would seem silly to use the same setup/producer/room/mic setup twice).


----------



## Silence-is-Golden (Sep 4, 2018)

miket said:


> I wish Spitfire, and others, would implement a scripted legato for all their longs other than the real legatos, like CSS has (unless I misunderstand that feature). No, it's not the real thing, but they sound just fine in context and better than gapped notes.


Maybe you can ask @Rob how he recently added a legato script to a library purchase.
Maybe its also possible for the lib you refer to?

PS: a rarely visiting member with an (in)famous but well resepected reputation on ears and skill, more or less condemned ssts to bits.
Some of the comparisons made on the “other forum” between ssts and SCS do indeed speak for themselves......


----------



## Raphioli (Sep 4, 2018)

I also don't think you can really compare GBs and programming.
Even if the library is small, there are libraries like sample modeling trumpet which sounds really good, but is a really small library.
I'm assuming a lot of work went in to inventing the script and we are paying for the scripting "skill" as well.
We can't simply compare the cost of talented/skilled programmers.

Sure if you simply compare the man power (how many people were involved), you have the musicians, engineers and many other people involved in playing & sampling lots of samples.
But you can't devalue the skills/intelligence of the programmers.
Lots of amazing plugins are all small in size, but some cost even $1000+ (e.g SPAT).
Because skilled/talented programmers invented a unique piece of program/script which other could not.

I unfortunately don't own LASS, but I've heard and read about what it can do. And I don't think its fair to just consider it overpriced just because the size of the library is small. Programming is not cheaper than sampling, especially when the programmer is talented and has invented something that no other developer has.
In that regard, I wouldn't be surprised if CSS cost a lot more, not because of the size of the library, but because of the genius legato/portamento scripting it has.

And finally on to the topic, I wish Spitfire put more time in to improving their scripting further.
They did a really good job with the Performance Legato patch in SCS. I personally really like it.
And if this is a new chapter, I personally would have loved if they came out with next gen "Performance Legato 2".
But kind of disappointed they don't even have the original Performance Legato patch included in SStS.

Sorry for the long post.


----------



## SoNowWhat? (Sep 4, 2018)

StatKsn said:


> I see a line like "an incredible versatile pro-end dry stage library" to be just a bunch of copywriting and personally avoid reading it. I think Spitfire actually did a good job presenting the library in a honest, raw state in their walkthrough.


I will say this for Spitfire, I feel that they always present their libraries just as they are in walk throughs. I have _*never*_ gotten a nasty surprise when purchasing from them. And to this point I love everything that I have from them, but I don’t have SStS and won’t be getting it. It doesn’t offer what I’d hoped it would at the start and I have most of this covered already.


----------



## StatKsn (Sep 5, 2018)

Re-peat has shared a very comprehensive review in the other forum. IMO legatos do need a fix, or they are quite a step down from other SF libraries. I can clearly hear pops/clicks, same attack artifact transposed/machine-gunning etc. Transposed samples are mostly fine with slow attack sustains, but should not be used with legatos/something that should do a melodic flowing line.

https://www.thesoundboard.net/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=3077&start=50

Unlike him, I honestly liked the timbre. It is harsh and filthy (in a good way). But I mostly do hybrid stuff rather than orchestral.


----------



## Casiquire (Sep 6, 2018)

I do also like the timbre despite many here having mixed feelings. My interest is still sort of aroused, they're right on the cusp of getting me to buy into the Spitfire world, but falling just slightly short. I think I'll keep my eye out, but I don't have a good feeling that the library will get any significant updates.


----------



## Gerbil (Sep 6, 2018)

These two sound nothing alike so it's a chalk and cheese scenario.

I think the Studio Strings could be really good after an update or three. I've just spent some more time with it and do find it quite enjoyable to play. There is a lot of expression in there. What I do like is that it also seems to fit well with a few other libraries I opened up such as cinewinds and VSL winds. 

CSS is the finished article. It would be a far wiser purchase if you want a base string library but Studio Strings have enough material in there to make it a very useful additional library.


----------



## sostenuto (Sep 6, 2018)

Gonna purchase now despite its warts and all. 
Join those who indicated strong preference to pay slightly more for Core and receive another Mic or so.


----------



## LHall (Sep 6, 2018)

I was about to reach for my wallet when I started looking at Studio Strings. Then I perceived from the video that legato portamentos were only included in the full sections and not the divisi sections. Huge oversight when they spent so much time on articulations I'd only use once in a blue moon. Differing amounts of portamento in divisi sections are wonderful in getting extra realism in runs and many passages. Hope they add those at some point. 

By the way, I'm a user of LASS almost since it was first released. It's definitely not over-priced. Considering the work it has allowed me to do, it's really worth far more than I paid for it to me.


----------



## Eptesicus (Sep 6, 2018)

LHall said:


> I was about to reach for my wallet when I started looking at Studio Strings. Then I perceived from the video that legato portamentos were only included in the full sections and not the divisi sections. Huge oversight when they spent so much time on articulations I'd only use once in a blue moon. Differing amounts of portamento in divisi sections are wonderful in getting extra realism in runs and many passages. Hope they add those at some point.
> 
> By the way, I'm a user of LASS almost since it was first released. It's definitely not over-priced. Considering the work it has allowed me to do, it's really worth far more than I paid for it to me.



Yes that is another failing of the library in my opinion. Not much point in the divisi sections if they have such limited articulations in comparison.

I would prefer to pay a bit more but have proper full divisi sections.


----------



## Jay Panikkar (Sep 7, 2018)

rottoy said:


> I just program everything like synth pads and wait for Hans Zimmer to wave his magic 344-string-player-wand in my direction.


Works best if you've got a '82 Chateau Margaux on hand.


----------

