# A cool tip to make your Strings Sparkle from Spitfire Audio



## muziksculp (Mar 15, 2016)

Hi,

Here is a cool tip from Spitfire Audio (Mr. Christian Henson), showing how to make your strings sparkle ! 

Hint : Creative Layering of various String Articulations. 

I found it quite helpful, and interesting. (Thanks Christian). 

Cheers,
Muziksculp


----------



## Ashermusic (Mar 15, 2016)

I'm sorry, I met Christian at NAMM and he is a really nice guy and obviously very talented, but I think he made it sound organish in this case. Once again, absolutely no disrespect intended, but I would never want my strings to sound like that.

If he used the Logic Pro Humanize transform set on each region, or better yet, printed it out and played it on each articulation, it would help.


----------



## TimCox (Mar 15, 2016)

Ashermusic said:


> I think he made it sound organish


Totally agree. It is a very cool sound if you're going for something more futuristic, not synth/not traditional but I don't know if I would use it anywhere


----------



## muziksculp (Mar 15, 2016)

I think the value here is the overall concept/idea. that one can layer various String articulations in varying degrees of presence via automation, to give more sonic dimension and color to a string performance, in the case of this example, I think Christian was trying to just showcase the overall concept as he builds up this arrangement, he was not trying to impress, or perfect it in this fast real-time, short demo.


----------



## Ashermusic (Mar 15, 2016)

muziksculp said:


> I think the value here is the overall concept/idea. that one can layer various String articulations in varying degrees of presence via automation, to give more sonic dimension and color to a string performance.



Once again, no offense, but is there anyone here who has not already figured that out yet? I started doing that with MIDI synths and samples back in the '90's 

Christian, if you read my comments please believe me when I say I respect you greatly and do not see this as an attack, because it isn't.


----------



## Carbs (Mar 15, 2016)

Ashermusic said:


> Once again, no offense, but is there anyone here who has not already figured that out yet? I started doing that with MIDI synths and samples back in the '90's
> 
> Christian, if you read my comments please believe me when I say I respect you greatly and do not see this as an attack, because it isn't.



So, are you saying that Christian has failed in executing a fairly rudimentary and common programming technique in this example?


----------



## Walid F. (Mar 16, 2016)

Cool tip!

What is a "coral" or "corale" sound? SF say that word quite a lot :D

W.


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Mar 16, 2016)

Walid F. said:


> Cool tip!
> 
> What is a "coral" or "corale" sound? SF say that word quite a lot :D
> 
> W.



I think it's "choral", referring to a choir.


----------



## Vlzmusic (Mar 16, 2016)

Jimmy Hellfire said:


> I think it's "choral", referring to a choir.



Not literally, of course. Its not suggesting a choir-like sound, but a type of balanced 4-voice harmony, owing its name partially to harmonic textures developed by Bach and alikes.

I agree, that this particular example does not sound convincing, whether the sample technique is common.

One thing I do not understand, is why the developers never try to build a library upon that principle, and instead of giving us close/room/surround mics, which are regular, down to earth practices in the recording world, give us a wild set of unconventional layers, based on timbres and whatever. Rosin/Wood/Bridge/Airy/Soft/Scratchy etc. In my eyes,
many of the mics sound similar enough, so while they might bring in something unique to the sound, they also multiply those basic characteristics which are similar, so before you notice, you have over the top, "huge" ensemble sound.


----------



## Ashermusic (Mar 16, 2016)

Carbs said:


> So, are you saying that Christian has failed in executing a fairly rudimentary and common programming technique in this example?



No, I am saying I didn't like the end result and I explained the reasons why I think I didn't like it. Please don't try to make more of that than it is.


----------



## Carbs (Mar 16, 2016)

Ah, you must have explained some more in today's ninja edit. No harm no foul. In this instance I'm not sure how much changing humanization parameters would matter, since, imho, there was an organ like quality in the sound before he layered anything. That'd be due to the fact he's playing chords using an ensemble patch more than anything, I'd imagine.


----------



## Ashermusic (Mar 16, 2016)

Carbs said:


> Ah, you must have explained some more in today's ninja edit. No harm no foul. In this instance I'm not sure how much changing humanization parameters would matter, since, imho, there was an organ like quality in the sound before he layered anything. That'd be due to the fact he's playing chords using an ensemble patch more than anything, I'd imagine.



True, for me the whole approach is flawed, because I don't think in terms of "strings", I think in terms of Violin 1, violin 2, viola, etc. If I want to compose starting with chords, I just use a patch from Solid State Strings or Omnisphere, print out the part, and then play in the individual lines.


----------



## Carbs (Mar 16, 2016)

Ashermusic said:


> True, for me the whole approach is flawed, because I don't think in terms of "strings", I think in terms of Violin 1, violin 2, viola, etc. If I want to compose starting with chords, I just use a patch from Solid State Strings or Omnisphere, print out the part, and then play in the individual lines.



Same here.


----------



## yellowstudio (Mar 23, 2016)

I didn`t watch the video before and had to read Jay`s post 5 times, asking myself why he wrote "organish" instead of "organic" and asking myself why that would be a bad thing...


----------

