# Does Hollywood Choirs Hold Up?



## Cory Pelizzari




----------



## Oliver

thx for this great review!
It's what i suspected since the release.
It's not sounding good, and the concept is also lacking.

Who needs a worldbuilder, when all you can hear is strange words coming out of the speakers?

So more praise to the "old" libraries of Soundiron and Fluffys Dominus!


----------



## Ashermusic

I totally disagree about it not "Sounding good."

https://ask.audio/articles/review-eastwest-hollywood-choirs


----------



## TGV

Decent review. It highlights the good and the bad, without wasting time on the information you can get from the producer. It does feel like the update SC never had (although that did have SATB plus boys, if I memory serves).


----------



## Cory Pelizzari

Ashermusic said:


> I totally disagree about it not "Sounding good."



I don't recall ever saying that it "doesn't sound good".


----------



## Ashermusic

Cory Pelizzari said:


> I don't recall ever saying that it "doesn't sound good".


 
You didn't, Oliver did.


----------



## synthpunk

I would be a little more patient for Something coming from England, just sayin'.

Look into Strezov as well.


----------



## Ashermusic

I have a few of the Strezov choirs and they are good. As is Olympus Elements.
I favor fairly dry libraries as a rule.


----------



## Cory Pelizzari

Ashermusic said:


> You didn't, Oliver did.



Ohhhhh. I missed that.


----------



## Oliver

yes i did, and it's right now, to be fair, only related to the demos i heard.
HC is not convincing for me, but thats just my humble opinion.


----------



## Ashermusic

Oliver said:


> yes i did, and it's right now, to be fair, only related to the demos i heard.
> HC is not convincing for me, but thats just my humble opinion.



Which you are certainly entitled to,. We all like what we like and do not what we do not. I think Nick's demo sounds great and when I play HC here, I like what I hear.


----------



## synthpunk

I have the Olympus Elements and boys choir, quite good. When I'm lazy I use Omni.

Choir is definitely one of the holy grail of sampling though.



Ashermusic said:


> I have a few of the Strezov choirs and they are good. As is Olympus Elements.
> I favor fairly dry libraries as a rule.


----------



## arznable

Great honest review, very helpful, thanks a lot! EW is offering a crossgrade for owners of Symphonic Choirs to Hollywood Choirs this week (Platinum for $399). Still on the fence about this. It seems like the question comes down to do I really want to upgrade the word builder to a newer version for $399? Or should I just use that money to buy Strezov Choirs, Olympus, or Requiem?

Honestly, the demo at the very end of your review video sounds just amazing. So it seems HC sounds pretty awesome if I use its word building patch...


----------



## Thorsten Meyer

Cory did also publish a written review here:

*Hollywood Choirs by East West and Quantum Leap Review*
Today we are having a close look at Hollywood Choirs – a cinematic choir library developed by East West and Quantum Leap. I’ll be covering the library’s look, sound and usability to give you an overall idea of what to expect from the library.

EastWest/Quantum Leap are partner companies responsible for the production and creation of critically acclaimed libraries such as Stormdrum, Symphonic Orchestra and the Hollywood Orchestra series many years ago. The two companies parted ways during the production of the Hollywood series and regrouped to release a new addition to the series called Hollywood Choirs.

Hollywood Choirs is designed for cinematic and orchestral use via East West’s PLAY engine, featuring multiple mic positions, a variety of vowel and consonant sustain for both male and female sections, and a robust word-builder designed to create custom lyrical performances.

Continue:

*Hollywood Choirs by East West and Quantum Leap Review*
https://www.strongmocha.com/2018/01/13/hollywood-choirs-by-east-west-and-quantum-leap-review/


----------



## ricoderks

Ashermusic said:


> I totally disagree about it not "Sounding good."
> 
> https://ask.audio/articles/review-eastwest-hollywood-choirs


I think the sound is really great and ist still very usable in context. Even with the wordbuilder. Perhaps the legato's are not as smooth as others but with some strings doubled or brass you can barely tell...


----------



## Divico

I used it last month when it was free during their competition. To be honest I wasn´t really satisfied. 
The WB felt uncomfortable as in symph choirs. Some samples where buggy and I got some hickup sounds and unsmooth transitions. As to the sound it was quite good but for me not suiting the price.
Here´s a short track I wrote with it trying to get some comprehensable latin out of WB


----------



## arznable

Divico said:


> I used it last month when it was free during their competition. To be honest I wasn´t really satisfied.
> The WB felt uncomfortable as in symph choirs. Some samples where buggy and I got some hickup sounds and unsmooth transitions. As to the sound it was quite good but for me not suiting the price.
> Here´s a short track I wrote with it trying to get some comprehensable latin out of WB



Wow, sounds awesome! Thanks for posting the song. It seems that it worths the $399 crossgrade price to me...


----------



## Divico

arznable said:


> Wow, sounds awesome! Thanks for posting the song. It seems that it worths the $399 crossgrade price to me...


Really? Thank you! Means a lot to me . Keep in mind that just one sentence in WB took me a loong time.


----------



## SyMTiK

Divico said:


> I used it last month when it was free during their competition. To be honest I wasn´t really satisfied.
> The WB felt uncomfortable as in symph choirs. Some samples where buggy and I got some hickup sounds and unsmooth transitions. As to the sound it was quite good but for me not suiting the price.
> Here´s a short track I wrote with it trying to get some comprehensable latin out of WB




Very impressive! But I completely agree about the word builder being uncomfortable to use. I found that the word builder is kind of a gimmick to me, fun to mess around with (absolutely hilarious at times to type in some ridiculous vulgar phrase and have a choir sing it back to you nicely xD)

In practice though, I just found it takes such a huge amount of time and effort to make something even remotely convincing, its just not worth it. I think its an incredible achievement to have any sort of programming that can emulate human speech AND singing but for me personally I think the work necessary to use the word builder is just not worth it in practice. The vowels and legatos are very nice in Hollywood Choirs though, but if it weren’t for Composer Cloud I cant say i would buy it for its full asking price, especially compared to products from Strezov and FluffyAudio. I have Storm Choir II and man it sounds excellent. 

But man you definitely did an excellent job with your piece, one of the more convincing uses of Hollywood Choirs Ive heard!


----------



## arznable

Divico said:


> Really? Thank you! Means a lot to me . Keep in mind that just one sentence in WB took me a loong time.


I thought all you need to do is choosing the latin words in the word builder phrase list and that's it. Wondering what kind of tweaking you have made that took you a long time? Thanks.


----------



## arznable

SyMTiK said:


> Very impressive! But I completely agree about the word builder being uncomfortable to use. I found that the word builder is kind of a gimmick to me, fun to mess around with (absolutely hilarious at times to type in some ridiculous vulgar phrase and have a choir sing it back to you nicely xD)
> 
> In practice though, I just found it takes such a huge amount of time and effort to make something even remotely convincing, its just not worth it. I think its an incredible achievement to have any sort of programming that can emulate human speech AND singing but for me personally I think the work necessary to use the word builder is just not worth it in practice. The vowels and legatos are very nice in Hollywood Choirs though, but if it weren’t for Composer Cloud I cant say i would buy it for its full asking price, especially compared to products from Strezov and FluffyAudio. I have Storm Choir II and man it sounds excellent.
> 
> But man you definitely did an excellent job with your piece, one of the more convincing uses of Hollywood Choirs Ive heard!


Despite the word builder is "uncomfortable to use" and "is kind of a gimmick", it is the only choir library that is capable of doing mockup like this in the market. Am I correct? Thanks for input.


----------



## JohnG

arznable said:


> Despite the word builder is "uncomfortable to use" and "is kind of a gimmick", it is the only choir library that is capable of doing mockup like this in the market. Am I correct? Thanks for input.



As far as I know, it's the only one that gives you full flexibility like this and is not impossibly clumsy. I say, "as far as I know," because I already have four or five choir libraries so I'm not exactly combing the market for new ones.

The two big benefits to the new word builder are 

1. that the syllables "land" where the music is written better -- less shifting around to winkle them into their correct spots -- and 

2. the library being recorded with less hall sound significantly improves clarity as well.

It's not the only word builder, but I have tried at least one other and it is ten times more cumbersome.

I still use the old Symphonic Choirs as well. It has much more hall sound and for some settings that's great.

[note: I have received free products from East West]


----------



## SyMTiK

arznable said:


> Despite the word builder is "uncomfortable to use" and "is kind of a gimmick", it is the only choir library that is capable of doing mockup like this in the market. Am I correct? Thanks for input.




Yes, it is one of the few libraries capable of theoretically typing in whatever words you want into it. I found however, that though it works sometimes and sounds convincing, other times it just sounds awkward, and takes many hours of painstakingly adjusting every single syllable to get something even remotely close to decent sounding. Even after all that, it still does not sound totally convincing, and I just find it to be a waste of time in that regard for me personally. If I have specific words in mind for a piece, I would much rather make a mockup with vowels, write the words, then record an actual choir to sing my piece. 

Dont get me wrong it is definitely awesome fun trying to get a realistic performance out of Hollyword Choirs with the wordbuilder, but in practice i just seriously never find myself using it, and if i want to use pre baked syllables or vowels and legato patches, there are much better sounding choirs on the market for the asking price of Hollywood Choirs.

Even in the example you posted, the syllables are still rather “off” sounding to my ears, and as someone who has sung in choirs for years, it just totally takes me out of it. I have found that pre recorded syllables sound so much more convincing than what word builder tries to do, because when recording full syllables and words, you capture more of the very fine details of the human voice as to how we pronounce things. Trying to emulate this the way wordbuilder does gets close, but even the slightest imperfection will turn the listener off, because humans can distinguish what is and is not a human voice remarkably well. 

If you like it thats great, i just personally do not find it to be a good enough sounding choir for the price compared to the competition, and i just think that the word builder is a cool concept but ultimately I just dont find myself using it because its too awkward to use, and I know many others who feel the same. And others who dont as well, i know some people who love having a wordbuilder option and there are some people who put in great amount of time trying to create convincing performances with it.

If you like it thats great! For me I just didnt dig it.


----------



## JohnG

Well, we disagree. I've had a lot of music sung by a real choir and their intelligibility is not necessarily better. 

Plus, if you don't like their performance you are stuck with it (vibrato etc.). When you are in school, you can rehearse a bit more and it doesn't necessarily cost anything. By contrast, when you are recording live in a commercial situation, sometimes because of budget or schedule you have to live with something you don't like. 

Just because the way choirs are, it can be a lot trickier with choir to get exactly what you want than the rest of the orchestra. They tire in the same way brass can, if you are rehearsing a single spot that's a strain for them; one mistake is quite audible (usually) unlike with a similar-sized string section where it can be less conspicuous.

I too have sung in choirs for many years and I recognize that there is some kinds of music that would be pretty much impossible to bring off with _any_ choir library. Coincidentally, one of the professional singers I work with just emailed me a very cool piece she wrote that includes all kinds of unusual syllables and vocalizations that I don't think could be done electronically.

That said, I just added a choir bit in some music for Netflix that took minutes, not hours, with Hollywood Choirs. It sounds great, is on the beat, and is actually amazingly convincing.


----------



## pmcrockett

The problem I've most often heard with people's Hollywood Choirs use is that even aside from any votox programming snags, people tend not to have much of a sense of phrasing and overall musical cohesion. This is a problem in sampled instruments in general, and it's especially a problem in Hollywood Choirs because there's so much detail work involved that it's easy to lose sight of the big picture. But it's ultimately a user problem as much as a library problem; it can be worked around if you know what you're doing, but it's not an out-of-the-box thing.

Honestly, people's focus on out-of-the-box sound for HC baffles me. Why use the library at all if you're not going to take the time to learn it? Like, I get that EastWest needs to make sales and therefore needs to emphasize how easy it is to get fast results in order to appeal to the largest possible userbase, but the result of this marketing emphasis seems to be that a lot of potential buyers expect miracles and end up disappointed by the fact that synthesizing an intelligible human voice, much less doing it in a way that is musically satisfactory, is actually _a whole lot of work_. You have to know what a choir ought to sound like, be good at audio editing, be good with sampled instruments in general, and be patient enough to sit through the whole editing process. Falling short in any of those areas can tank the whole thing. It's a tall order.

The three best quick tips I can give for votox editing are that consonants are too loud by default; you almost always need to blend multiple vowels together; and unless you're doing _fff_ trailer music sorts of stuff, your vowels, rather than starting at the default full volume, should usually be faded in, reaching full volume somewhere between 200 and 750 ms. Oh, and a fourth -- edit with reverb turned off.


----------



## Divico

arznable said:


> I thought all you need to do is choosing the latin words in the word builder phrase list and that's it. Wondering what kind of tweaking you have made that took you a long time? Thanks.


Unfortunately not. I think the WB is capable of quite a lot buuuutt you need to dig in and make sure every sylable sounds the way you want it to sound. Typing in votox is the first step, adjusting length and volume of letters the second one


----------



## Sosimple88

I played with Hollywood Choirs during their demo contest. For the time I had it, I found it quite easy to get clear english sentences for what I tried.


----------



## SyMTiK

JohnG said:


> Well, we disagree. I've had a lot of music sung by a real choir and their intelligibility is not necessarily better.
> 
> Plus, if you don't like their performance you are stuck with it (vibrato etc.). When you are in school you can rehearse a bit more and it doesn't necessarily cost anything. When you are recording live, sometimes you have to live with something you don't like, and that's a lot trickier with choir than the rest of the orchestra.
> 
> I too have sung in choirs for many years and I recognize that there is some kinds of music that would be pretty much impossible to bring off with _any_ choir library. Coincidentally, one of the professional singers I work with just emailed me a very cool piece she wrote that includes all kinds of unusual syllables and vocalizations that I don't think could be done electronically.
> 
> That said, I just added a choir bit in some music for Netflix that took minutes, not hours, with Hollywood Choirs. It sounds great, is on the beat, and is actually amazingly convincing.



My assessment was a bit too harsh, been a bit stressed lately from school with exams and projects at the end of the semester so I was in a bit of a ranty mood haha. My apologies.

To be fair I probably haven’t truly used it enough to give a fair assessment, I think im just a bit more biased to Strezov’s choirs because I have used Storm Choir II forever now and have grown very fond of its sound and ease of use. I do think Hollywood Choirs sounds great, but I don’t know that its worth the full $800 (its at $600 right now on sale though which may be worth it to some, probably worth getting a month of composer cloud to try it first). As part of Composer Cloud though it is MORE than worth it (which is how i have it) 

I probably just need to put in more time to learn the wordbuilder honestly


----------



## JohnG

I like Strezov's sound too, based on the demos. It sounds as though you think it's very easy to use, which is a plus. I have wondered whether it has a wide range of applications beyond the initial release, which sounded great but was pretty clearly focused on the "Storm" thing. For that though it sounded excellent to me in the demos.


----------



## SyMTiK

JohnG said:


> I like Strezov's sound too, based on the demos. It sounds as though you think it's very easy to use, which is a plus. I have wondered whether it has a wide range of applications beyond the initial release, which sounded great but was pretty clearly focused on the "Storm" thing. For that though it sounded excellent to me in the demos.



Storm Choir II itself is definitely a bit more focused on big and loud. It can do softer stuff, but its not its main purpose so there are libraries that definitely do it better. Wotan and Freyja though seem to be a bit more versatile judging from videos and demos. I would love to get my hands on either of them at some point, they sound fantastic, but they're a bit out of my price range for something I don't necessarily need at the moment. Perhaps they'll change my mind next time they have a big sale


----------



## Illico

Like all libraries, it needs a learning time to be able to use it at 100%. EWHC is part of it with the WBuilder.
I also quickly used it during the contest, it was quite easy.
The only weak point from my point of view is the lack of a real slur-legato.


----------



## arznable

JohnG said:


> It's not the only word builder, but I have tried at least one other and it is ten times more cumbersome.



Hi John, thanks so much for your helpful comments. By the way, I thought Symphonic Choirs and Hollywood Choirs are the only libraries that have flexible word builders like this. Can I ask what is the other one that you tried?



SyMTiK said:


> Dont get me wrong it is definitely awesome fun trying to get a realistic performance out of Hollyword Choirs with the wordbuilder, but in practice i just seriously never find myself using it, and if i want to use pre baked syllables or vowels and legato patches, there are much better sounding choirs on the market for the asking price of Hollywood Choirs.



Thanks for comments as well Chris, really appreciate it. I am asking this question because I am thinking if the $399 investment worth it or not. Just want to get more opinions like yours to make a more informed decision. Your honest review are very helpful, thanks. By the way, went to your soundcloud webpage, and I have to say your compositions are so cool and great! And the 8Dio "Laurie" is a great sounding library as well!



Divico said:


> Unfortunately not. I think the WB is capable of quite a lot buuuutt you need to dig in and make sure every sylable sounds the way you want it to sound. Typing in votox is the first step, adjusting length and volume of letters the second one



I see, thanks Divico. I will take this into account when making my crossgrade decision.


----------



## SyMTiK

arznable said:


> Thanks for comments as well Chris, really appreciate it. I am asking this question because I am thinking if the $399 investment worth it or not. Just want to get more opinions like yours to make a more informed decision. Your honest review are very helpful, thanks. By the way, went to your soundcloud webpage, and I have to say your compositions are so cool and great! And the 8Dio "Laurie" is a great sounding library as well!



Thanks so much! Really appreciate that.

For $400 I think its definitely a worthy consideration, as at that price point it is a good deal cheaper than a lot of other options on the market. If youre truly set on a word builder then Id definitely say go for it. However if youre open to libraries with pre recorded syllables, id suggest taking a look at FluffyAudio Dominus Choir and Strezov Wotan and Freyja. Dominus is $380 so at that price it’s probably a more equal comparison, and it truly sounds fantastic from what I’ve heard. I sadly don’t have it but I do know it gets a lot of praise. Wotan and Freyja as a bundle go for $550 so definitely more expensive than Hollywood Choirs but definitely an option to consider. They do have a rather particular sound (very Lord of the Rings sounding) but if you love that sound theres no library thats gonna do it better. In this regard Hollywood Choirs probably proves slightly more versatile, as the sound is much more “neutral” if thats the right word.


----------



## JohnG

arznable said:


> Hi John, thanks so much for your helpful comments. By the way, I thought Symphonic Choirs and Hollywood Choirs are the only libraries that have flexible word builders like this. Can I ask what is the other one that you tried?



I'll PM you.


----------



## X-Bassist

Cory Pelizzari said:


>



Thanks for the review Cory! This is why I rarely buy an East West Library on release, I can never seem to find a review or walkthrough that is honest and just plays through the library. It’s always a glowing review or a video playing highly tweaked midi tracks. I really appreciate your honesty and bare bones review.  Ironically after watching it I still love the sound, even without a great legato, and am interested in the multiple mic positions, but may wait for a sale that brngs it down to a more realistic cost. Thanks again!


----------



## arznable

SyMTiK said:


> Thanks so much! Really appreciate that.
> 
> For $400 I think its definitely a worthy consideration, as at that price point it is a good deal cheaper than a lot of other options on the market. If youre truly set on a word builder then Id definitely say go for it. However if youre open to libraries with pre recorded syllables, id suggest taking a look at FluffyAudio Dominus Choir and Strezov Wotan and Freyja. Dominus is $380 so at that price it’s probably a more equal comparison, and it truly sounds fantastic from what I’ve heard. I sadly don’t have it but I do know it gets a lot of praise. Wotan and Freyja as a bundle go for $550 so definitely more expensive than Hollywood Choirs but definitely an option to consider. They do have a rather particular sound (very Lord of the Rings sounding) but if you love that sound theres no library thats gonna do it better. In this regard Hollywood Choirs probably proves slightly more versatile, as the sound is much more “neutral” if thats the right word.



Thanks Chris. The choir libraries that you mentioned are all really good. Dominus Choir sounded very classical and is really great at more lyrical pieces, but it is not aimed for epic and loud trailer pieces. Wotan and Freyja, as you mentioned, have a wonderful LOTR sound, just amazing. Storm Choir 2 is great for epic trailer sounds, but the lyrical side is a bit weak I think. Hollywood Choirs is kind of in the middle and quite versatile. It seems each choir library has its own sound and specific use. Try to find a single library that ruled them all is not quite possible.

Also, not sure if you have noticed or not, Spitfire will be releasing a choir library soon as well. I am quite excited about it. I think it will sound like Dominus just by judging from its trailers and the limited info from the website.


----------



## SyMTiK

arznable said:


> Also, not sure if you have noticed or not, Spitfire will be releasing a choir library soon as well. I am quite excited about it. I think it will sound like Dominus just by judging from its trailers and the limited info from the website.



I did notice, I'm very curious to see what it will be like. No doubt I think it is going to be more in line with Dominus. They're working with Eric Whitacre and knowing his music and Spitfire's particular sound, I'm sure it will be more aimed at doing quieter, more detailed stuff. I'm sure its going to sound beautiful though!

I am mostly curious about what type of interface it will be, if it's going to have a word builder like East West, or a syllable/phrase library like Dominus and Strezov's Choirs. We'll just have to wait and see!  I'm sure it will be pricey though


----------



## arznable

SyMTiK said:


> I'm sure it will be pricey though



Yes, that's for sure. That's why I only buy their stuff when they are on sale, like the Black Friday sale, Christmas sale, etc. I also took advantage on the Tundra sale earlier this year. By the way, Tundra is just amazing! I love it!


----------



## JohnG

X-Bassist said:


> I can never seem to find a review or walkthrough that is honest and just plays through the library.



right here: http://www.soundsonline.com/hollywood-choirs

Scroll down and select, "Watch the Walkthrough"

Nick almost always does this for their libraries.


----------



## Sosimple88

For Wordbuilder, there is the Virhamonic choirs libraries.


----------



## X-Bassist

JohnG said:


> right here: http://www.soundsonline.com/hollywood-choirs
> 
> Scroll down and select, "Watch the Walkthrough"
> 
> Nick almost always does this for their libraries.



I really like Nicks walkthroughs, thanks for the link. He does actually play the instrument, which I appreciate.

But quotes like "The sound quality and dynamics, they are just in another league" (@4:26 in the walkthrough) sound like a paid quote. Which I suppose it is in a way. I understand wanting to sell the product you put so much work into. But I don't think I've ever heard this kind of used car talk from a Mike Greene or DJ walkthrough. Perhaps they are just a bit more modest, but that's why it comes across as sincere. 

I suppose this is just nit-picking, apologies... Or is it Nick-picking?... I'll stop. Thanks again.


----------



## Quantum Leap

I stumbled upon this thread and have a couple things to say. Since the beginning of virtual instruments there has been a ton of misinformation floating around about libraries. Remember all the guys that insisted GPO was so much better than EWQLSO? GG wasn’t even present at the GPO recordings. He bought bits and pieces from people. It was a con, but it worked for a while. Over a year. Then there was the Cinebrass 1 day recording that was so much better than Hollywood Brass until.... wait for it.... it wasn’t. The list goes on and on. Vienna started the whole legato thing and everyone just jumped on the band wagon and acted like they invented true legato. VSL didn’t get enough respect for what they did. From me either. I was too busy competing and I thought they had made a mistake with the sound.

Back to Hollywood Choirs

Sound- This might be the only choir library without any noise reduction. That makes a huge difference. We did some things equipment and money wise that goes way beyond what our competition has done with maybe one exception. Guys, most of the choir libraries don’t sound that great. Some do sound great. Sometimes it seems that some of you simply can’t hear the difference between a bad sounding library like that old Soundiron one that everyone loved and one of 8 Dio’s newer ones that sound good. I don’t know what to say about that. Some of this stuff has weird imaging, tons of noise reduction, tunnel sound, very little dynamics, vibrato that’s fighting itself, slow attacks etc.. That’s why I make a point about the sound. It’s an attempt to highlight a feature. It’s not used car talk. The best equipment available, great hall and singers and a great engineer with proper dynamics recorded pays off. If we use Shawn Murphy, guess what? It might be the best sounding..... Hollywood Choirs tries to do one thing better than everyone else. And that’s a hyper dynamic, word building, great sounding choir. It won’t sound great in every Acapella unless you really master WordBuilder, but in a piece of music it just works with no effort. And it has no equal in that respect.

Legato-wise this library is poor. We just did a couple quick things as an add on. But, in my experience, the word builder makes the library sound very real and connected. It lends a lot more realism than legato patches in most instances. Unless you just want a legato vowel sound, then there are much better options out there.

Staccato wise this library is poor. We chose not to focus on that at all. You can however use WordBuilder and play staccato and it sounds fine unless you want hyper aggressive and short stuff. Then your fkd.

If you dismiss the word building as a gimmick you are really missing out. Most choral music will greatly benefit from this feature. Because you have control over everything including dynamics and timing, wordbuilding is superior to prerecorded phrases or words. —- That is most of the time. If you base your composition off the feel and timing of a prerecorded phrase, it will probably sound great.

If you can only have one choir library, what do you choose?

The guy that started this thread is an a$$. Why? He accused us of buying reviews. F that guy. He smugly says we are lost in some time warp or some $hit. The internet is great until people with miniature John thomas’ Decide they are going to vomit over people that deserve a bit of respect. He didn’t quite get it. That’s fine. It will happen, but he should have spent the time that he took to make that disrespectful video on learning the product.

You can say whatever you want about me, but I have contributed a lot to the composer community. I love you guys and what we do. Do you think I needed to make this choir library. And share it? Nope. I wanted to complete my 20 year wordbuilding journey with something I could be proud of. Remember Voices Of The Apocalypse? Some of you speak like we are some kind of charlatans. It’s ridiculous. We made the most popular by a mile orchestral library ever - EWQLSO. People really liked and used this library for over a decade, some still use it. We made some of the most popular and deep ethnic products ever - Silk, Ra. We started the trend and made some great and hugely successful epic percussion libraries - SD 1-3. We made what was the best piano library at the time and is still great QL Pianos. Symphonic Choirs was massively successful and popular library in spite of its word building flaws. Virtual Instrument of the year for a reason. Also a trend setter. We made Hollywood Orchestra with the best talent out there including Sean Murphy and Thomas Bergersen. We spared no expense or effort, and in my opinion that library is the best complete orchestra there is to this day, along with Spitfire probably. We also made the best reverb for film composers there is - Spaces 2. You can’t dismiss all that when you talk about us. Thanks to everyone else who has been fair minded and reasonable.


----------



## Gerbil

I think so much could be resolved by just being more transparent in the advertising. If it was crystal clear that staccato samples and playable legatos were not the primary focus of the library then maybe the reviews would be kinder as the library would have been purchased by people knowing what to expect. Some companies like Imperfect Samples and Musical Sampling make it clear what you can and cannot expect. Others like 8dio and Spitfire have often touted their products as being the only thing you'll need so it's little wonder people are pissed off when they discover it's not.

All that said, I have zero issue with Eastwest products, enjoy using them all and and grateful that you, Nick, had the vision and tenacity to see these things through to fruition so this isn't a dig at your work; just an observation.


----------



## Parsifal666

I'm certainly interested in Hollywood Choirs, but (with no intention of a backhanded compliment) I've perfected my workflow and output with EWSCP so thoroughly that I have a hard time rationalizing yet another choir library (I have to give it to Strezov for being awfully tempting too). As far as that old Soundiron...do you mean Requiem? I have respect for that library, the updates in particular have been nice.


----------



## thov72

Quantum Leap said:


> The guy that started this thread is an a$$. Why? He accused us of buying reviews. F that guy



very kind replies for a not so kind post. Wondering if the sh!tstorm will come....but, Sir, your post is an open invitation to all EWQL haters to join the drama club.
I don´t use your products, just because I use others (that are imho just as good). Might be using some of your vi ´s someday, so I´d say I´m not biased. But man, please read Hans´ posts to get a feeling how someone in your position should behave around here.


----------



## X-Bassist

Quantum Leap said:


> I stumbled upon this thread and have a couple things to say. Since the beginning of virtual instruments there has been a ton of misinformation floating around about libraries. Remember all the guys that insisted GPO was so much better than EWQLSO? GG wasn’t even present at the GPO recordings. He bought bits and pieces from people. It was a con, but it worked for a while. Over a year. Then there was the Cinebrass 1 day recording that was so much better than Hollywood Brass until.... wait for it.... it wasn’t. The list goes on and on. Vienna started the whole legato thing and everyone just jumped on the band wagon and acted like they invented true legato. VSL didn’t get enough respect for what they did. From me either. I was too busy competing and I thought they had made a mistake with the sound.
> 
> Back to Hollywood Choirs
> 
> Sound- This might be the only choir library without any noise reduction. That makes a huge difference. We did some things equipment and money wise that goes way beyond what our competition has done with maybe one exception. Guys, most of the choir libraries don’t sound that great. Some do sound great. Sometimes it seems that some of you simply can’t hear the difference between a bad sounding library like that old Soundiron one that everyone loved and one of 8 Dio’s newer ones that sound good. I don’t know what to say about that. Some of this stuff has weird imaging, tons of noise reduction, tunnel sound, very little dynamics, vibrato that’s fighting itself, slow attacks etc.. That’s why I make a point about the sound. It’s an attempt to highlight a feature. It’s not used car talk. The best equipment available, great hall and singers and a great engineer with proper dynamics recorded pays off. If we use Shawn Murphy, guess what? It might be the best sounding..... Hollywood Choirs tries to do one thing better than everyone else. And that’s a hyper dynamic, word building, great sounding choir. It won’t sound great in every Acapella unless you really master WordBuilder, but in a piece of music it just works with no effort. And it has no equal in that respect.
> 
> Legato-wise this library is poor. We just did a couple quick things as an add on. But, in my experience, the word builder makes the library sound very real and connected. It lends a lot more realism than legato patches in most instances. Unless you just want a legato vowel sound, then there are much better options out there.
> 
> Staccato wise this library is poor. We chose not to focus on that at all. You can however use WordBuilder and play staccato and it sounds fine unless you want hyper aggressive and short stuff. Then your fkd.
> 
> If you dismiss the word building as a gimmick you are really missing out. Most choral music will greatly benefit from this feature. Because you have control over everything including dynamics and timing, wordbuilding is superior to prerecorded phrases or words. —- That is most of the time. If you base your composition off the feel and timing of a prerecorded phrase, it will probably sound great.
> 
> If you can only have one choir library, what do you choose?
> 
> The guy that started this thread is an a$$. Why? He accused us of buying reviews. F that guy. He smugly says we are lost in some time warp or some $hit. The internet is great until people with miniature John thomas’ Decide they are going to vomit over people that deserve a bit of respect. He didn’t quite get it. That’s fine. It will happen, but he should have spent the time that he took to make that disrespectful video on learning the product.
> 
> You can say whatever you want about me, but I have contributed a lot to the composer community. I love you guys and what we do. Do you think I needed to make this choir library. And share it? Nope. I wanted to complete my 20 year wordbuilding journey with something I could be proud of. Remember Voices Of The Apocalypse? Some of you speak like we are some kind of charlatans. It’s ridiculous. We made the most popular by a mile orchestral library ever - EWQLSO. People really liked and used this library for over a decade, some still use it. We made some of the most popular and deep ethnic products ever - Silk, Ra. We started the trend and made some great and hugely successful epic percussion libraries - SD 1-3. We made what was the best piano library at the time and is still great QL Pianos. Symphonic Choirs was massively successful and popular library in spite of its word building flaws. Virtual Instrument of the year for a reason. Also a trend setter. We made Hollywood Orchestra with the best talent out there including Sean Murphy and Thomas Bergersen. We spared no expense or effort, and in my opinion that library is the best complete orchestra there is to this day, along with Spitfire probably. We also made the best reverb for film composers there is - Spaces 2. You can’t dismiss all that when you talk about us. Thanks to everyone else who has been fair minded and reasonable.



Thank you for the response Nick. East West does have some of the best recorded samples I know of. As a recording engineer I can hear the quality of the mics and gear you used, and the choice of players seems top notch as well.

So my question is where is Play Pro? Having such great samples without any way of making your own patches, without keyswitch patches that have many articulations, or a way to stack or layer articulations without multiple instances (see videos of Impact Soundworks Ventus or OT Capsule or Project Sam...), makes East West seem... forgive me... outdated by comparison for a working composer.

Seriously consider revamping Play. Even if it’s not Play Pro, make some more keyswitch patches, ensemble patches, patches that try combining things or allow us to get to all the articulations better. Have a CC assignment section, allow composers to customized how the patches are used and controlled, even if the layout can’t be changed. Consider how to best make the great samples you already have, shine. Check for any pitch or programming issues.

This would revamp every library. Yes, it should be a free upgrade, but it would bring in new customers to libraries that just deserve a little more respect and apprecition. Getting the samples right is where many samples libraries fall short, yet you have this difficult stage covered. In some ways it is the player and the patches that are holding these libraries back.

The Hollywood library could use this, SD3, Silk, Ra, even the new Hollywood Choirs would all benifit with a great player update.

Thanks for listening and putting so much work into these samples, it does make a huge difference.

-XB


----------



## StatKsn

IIRC Nick had made clear that HC's focus is wordbuilding/sustains playability and not much about legato in this forum or elsewhere. So I can feel his frustration. Furthermore, I believe he has no control over EastWest's advertising practice or the development of Play Pro (which I suspect is a vaporware of the century and they aren't serious about it).

It is however pretty normal for a library to be compared (both technical/peformance-wise and sound-wise) with current peers, especially considering that HC was advertised as the choir product to beat all the competition. The problem is "good sound" is purely subjective and the mainstream definition of that can even change from time to time. It is inevitable to get some criticism from those doesn't share the same concept of good choirs library as Nick. Some may think HC's sound is too clean and lacks punch compared to "dirty" Soundiron libs (I have to confess that I liked them very much). Dynamics range however is clearly the feat HC does better than most peers, and that and the pristine sound makes HC very "Hollywood", which I think is often overlooked. Also wordbuilder is definitely not a gimmick.

Re: if you can only have one choir library, I'd say Genesis (recently released). The library has one of the most advanced scripting and consistently high playability IMO.


----------



## Ashermusic

I think HC is gorgeous.


----------



## Quantum Leap

Gerbil said:


> I think so much could be resolved by just being more transparent in the advertising. If it was crystal clear that staccato samples and playable legatos were not the primary focus of the library then maybe the reviews would be kinder as the library would have been purchased by people knowing what to expect. Some companies like Imperfect Samples and Musical Sampling make it clear what you can and cannot expect. Others like 8dio and Spitfire have often touted their products as being the only thing you'll need so it's little wonder people are pissed off when they discover it's not.
> 
> All that said, I have zero issue with Eastwest products, enjoy using them all and and grateful that you, Nick, had the vision and tenacity to see these things through to fruition so this isn't a dig at your work; just an observation.



Good point.


----------



## Quantum Leap

X-Bassist said:


> Thank you for the response Nick. East West does have some of the best recorded samples I know of. As a recording engineer I can hear the quality of the mics and gear you used, and the choice of players seems top notch as well.
> 
> So my question is where is Play Pro? Having such great samples without any way of making your own patches, without keyswitch patches that have many articulations, or a way to stack or layer articulations without multiple instances (see videos of Impact Soundworks Ventus or OT Capsule or Project Sam...), makes East West seem... forgive me... outdated by comparison for a working composer.
> 
> Seriously consider revamping Play. Even if it’s not Play Pro, make some more keyswitch patches, ensemble patches, patches that try combining things or allow us to get to all the articulations better. Have a CC assignment section, allow composers to customized how the patches are used and controlled, even if the layout can’t be changed. Consider how to best make the great samples you already have, shine. Check for any pitch or programming issues.
> 
> This would revamp every library. Yes, it should be a free upgrade, but it would bring in new customers to libraries that just deserve a little more respect and apprecition. Getting the samples right is where many samples libraries fall short, yet you have this difficult stage covered. In some ways it is the player and the patches that are holding these libraries back.
> 
> The Hollywood library could use this, SD3, Silk, Ra, even the new Hollywood Choirs would all benifit with a great player update.
> 
> Thanks for listening and putting so much work into these samples, it does make a huge difference.
> 
> -XB



The reason is we haven’t been hacked yet. No pirated libraries. PLAY was the worst best decision ever made. Lol and crying a bit. Some (not all by any means) of the EW haters are actually the guys that can’t pirate the stuff. It’s pisses them off. 90% of kontakt library users are pirates. Play actually has some advantages over Kontakt. And it’s pretty good these days. Hollywood choirs interface is decent. It’s not all bad at all. And soon...


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire

I have Hollywood Strings, Brass and Perc, but I never use them. I'm attracted to the sound, but in practice, I can't put up with EW PAIN. Not being able to have multiple articulations on the same channel and use keyswitches is ridiculous. It takes away so much value from these libraries, it's bitter.


----------



## Jdiggity1

Jimmy Hellfire said:


> I have Hollywood Strings, Brass and Perc, but I never use them. I'm attracted to the sound, but in practice, I can't put up with EW PAIN. Not being able to have multiple articulations on the same channel and use keyswitches is ridiculous. It takes away so much value from these libraries, it's bitter.


Come now Jimmy... we know you use Cubase, which has a fantastic tool called Expression Maps. This allows you to create your own keyswitches! Granted, you did specify "on the same channel", but does that actually make a real-world difference, and "take away so much value from these libraries"? Bit of a weak argument there...

Though one thing I _would _love to be able to do in PLAY is have more control over which samples are enabled, such as taking RR #2 out if it has a noise I don't like. Or adjusting sample start times, etc. But even most new kontakt libraries are locked down and don't allow this, making the differences between Kontakt and Play harder and harder to identify.


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire

Jdiggity1 said:


> Come now Jimmy... we know you use Cubase, which has a fantastic tool called Expression Maps. This allows you to create your own keyswitches! Granted, you did specify "on the same channel", but does that actually make a real-world difference, and "take away so much value from these libraries"? Bit of a weak argument there...



Well it's not an argument, it is what it is. I have of course created expression maps for those libraries, but having to spread the arts across multiple channels is suboptimal and introduces hassles I choose to simply not have by using other libraries instead.

It's not like I'm asking for some advanced, outlandish thing either. The damn thing doesn't support keyswitches. It's silly.


----------



## Jdiggity1

Jimmy Hellfire said:


> Well it's not an argument, it is what it is. I have of course created expression maps for those libraries, but having to spread the arts across multiple channels is suboptimal and introduces hassles I choose to simply not have by using other libraries instead.
> 
> It's not like I'm asking for some advanced, outlandish thing either. The damn thing doesn't support keyswitches. It's silly.


What do you mean though? Obviously the libraries do have keyswitch patches (though I agree, products like HWS could certainly do with more options). But is it not just a library-specific thing, as opposed to a sampler-related thing?
As far as I know, kontakt doesn't allow you to create keyswitches for libraries that do not include them by default.


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire

Jdiggity1 said:


> What do you mean though? Obviously the libraries do have keyswitch patches (though I agree, products like HWS could certainly do with more options). But is it not just a library-specific thing, as opposed to a sampler-related thing?
> As far as I know, kontakt doesn't allow you to create keyswitches for libraries that do not include them by default.



Technically it is the libraries that don't support it. But if the player had any advanced functionality, this could be mitigated without updating all the libraries one by one. In Capsule or VI Pro / Synchron Player, I can say: put this articulation into that slot and activate it via KS or CC so-and-so. The latter can do a hell of a lot more clever stuff too. But at least give me a library that has keyswitch functionality by itself, and perhaps lets me customize them. Like pretty much almost any Kontakt library you can buy.

In contrast, the EW ecosystem seems a bit primitive. Which does the pretty attractive sound a huge disservice. There's so many options for really great and competitive sounds nowadays. What makes a difference is being able to customize and optimize your workflow and get stuff done.


----------



## Parsifal666

Jimmy Hellfire said:


> Technically it is the libraries that don't support it. But if the player had any advanced functionality, this could be mitigated without updating all the libraries one by one. In Capsule or VI Pro / Synchron Player, I can say: put this articulation into that slot and activate it via KS or CC so-and-so. The latter can do a hell of a lot more clever stuff too. But at least give me a library that has keyswitch functionality by itself, and perhaps lets me customize them. Like pretty much almost any Kontakt library you can buy.
> 
> _In contrast, the EW ecosystem seems a bit primitive. Which does the pretty attractive sound a huge disservice. There's so many options for really great and competitive sounds nowadays. What makes a difference is being able to customize and optimize your workflow and get stuff done_.



The Play engine fer darn sure ain't Kontakt. But it's also not exactly dreadful imo. I personally don't have a problem using single articulations for each track (I'm on Windows 10, Dell Inspiron laptop, 32 gb RAM). A lot of the time it makes it easier for me to navigate my project, doing just that. 

I think one of the reasons I champion EW is because I did mostly master using their libraries...though I've got to admit having used them for over ten years now ( which of course makes a difference, especially when compared to folks who're just coming to those libraries through, say, CC). 

Play and EW takes patience, patience, patience. But I've found the rewards to be many, and are still ongoing.


----------



## Jdiggity1

Anyway I'd love to hear some more Hollywood choir examples


----------



## mouse

Quantum Leap said:


> The guy that started this thread is an a$$. Why? He accused us of buying reviews. F that guy.



Is it true that East West will only give reviewers a "full" version of a library (ie. an NFR that doesn't expire) if they "like" your review?


----------



## TeamLeader

X-Bassist said:


> Thank you for the response Nick.
> 
> So my question is where is Play Pro? ....
> 
> 
> -XB



There is the million dollar question. How many years ago was that promised to some of us? LOL (And yes, we have tons of EW stuff, but have put a moratorium on it. Along with counseling the 35 synch folks around the globe whom we handle to do the same.) I really wish for this reason that EW had stayed entirely in Kontakt. Sigh....


----------



## StatKsn

I still seriously believe that Play Pro was just a ploy to keep some interest in when Play was still a dumpster fire, haha.


----------



## Mike Greene

Quantum Leap said:


> The reason is we haven’t been hacked yet. No pirated libraries. PLAY was the worst best decision ever made. Lol and crying a bit. Some (not all by any means) of the EW haters are actually the guys that can’t pirate the stuff. It’s pisses them off. 90% of kontakt library users are pirates.


Personally, I think that was a really smart decision for that reason alone, even aside from the other reasons, like NI fees (you guys are saving a fortune, especially at the rates back then) and lack of control when another company hosts your libraries. (Don't even get me started on the hoops I have to jump through to make things NKS compatible - all so NI can sell more hardware.)


Quantum Leap said:


> Play actually has some advantages over Kontakt. And it’s pretty good these days. Hollywood choirs interface is decent. It’s not all bad at all. And soon...


I'll agree with that. Play is running well here now. Play Pro would still be nice, but I'm happy.


----------



## X-Bassist

Quantum Leap said:


> The reason is we haven’t been hacked yet. No pirated libraries. PLAY was the worst best decision ever made. Lol and crying a bit. Some (not all by any means) of the EW haters are actually the guys that can’t pirate the stuff. It’s pisses them off. 90% of kontakt library users are pirates. Play actually has some advantages over Kontakt. And it’s pretty good these days. Hollywood choirs interface is decent. It’s not all bad at all. And soon...



So the reason you haven’t been hacked yet is because you haven’t released Play Pro? Updating play to pro or adding some extra keyswitch patches will suddenly make Play hackable?

I suppose I’m missing a link there that isn’t clearly evident (not sure how we got to hacking) but I’ll assume some trade secrets are involved. Ok. So how about just making a large variety of keyswitch patches that might make using HO (specifically HS and HB) a little more user friendly? Jumping from track to track just to record shorts or pizz for a few bars really does slow down the composing and editing process. It’s what keeps me from reaching for HS and HB and has me buying other libraries.

But I really do appreciate the responses Nick. I’m sorry if you haven’t gotten enough respect on these forums in the past. Your end, planning, recording, editing, setting up the instruments (when your allowed to) - the “sound guru” on HO, SD3, etc- has been a major achievement in samples. But not because Doug came up with a sample company or made his own player, it was because you put the work into getting the best players, instruments, gear and took the time to record and edit those samples to make them the best they could be (and something you would want to personally use).

As a mixer and record engineer I know the work that went into HO. Seems a shame to take that work and stick it into a player that falls short for so many people that they would spend the money for the sounds and then not use them. I understand the concern about hacking, but surely there is a way to update play to be a bit more flexible without comprimising the hackability of the product. Capsule for instance does so much to allow some customizing (layered keyswitches and such) without effecting the underlying engine (it’s even simple to use) it seems a shame HO in Play can’t be similar.

I think almost everyone would forgive the absence of Play Pro (and even forget it’s mention) if play just had assignable keyswitches to combine patches and round robin selection (or de-selection) options. Not asking for access to the samples, just a little more flexibility to bring it up to speed with how most composers work these days. Apologies if these things are far beyond your control (been there) but hopefully when Doug asks what might be a good way to revamp the libraries and get more sales, you might mention it. HO will still be on my SSD, waiting for that eventful day. Thanks again.


----------



## TeamLeader

Mike Greene said:


> Personally, I think that was a really smart decision for that reason alone, even aside from the other reasons, like NI fees (you guys are saving a fortune, especially at the rates back then) and lack of control when another company hosts your libraries.



Hiya Mike.

Thank for chiming in about the piracy stuff. Hadn't even considered that as we don't deal with no stinking pirates.

Our main concern was more about delivering what was promised. As I get older I aint got time to wait LOL!!!


----------



## Cory Pelizzari

Quantum Leap said:


> I stumbled upon this thread and have a couple things to say. Since the beginning of virtual instruments there has been a ton of misinformation floating around about libraries. Remember all the guys that insisted GPO was so much better than EWQLSO? GG wasn’t even present at the GPO recordings. He bought bits and pieces from people. It was a con, but it worked for a while. Over a year. Then there was the Cinebrass 1 day recording that was so much better than Hollywood Brass until.... wait for it.... it wasn’t. The list goes on and on. Vienna started the whole legato thing and everyone just jumped on the band wagon and acted like they invented true legato. VSL didn’t get enough respect for what they did. From me either. I was too busy competing and I thought they had made a mistake with the sound.
> 
> Back to Hollywood Choirs
> 
> Sound- This might be the only choir library without any noise reduction. That makes a huge difference. We did some things equipment and money wise that goes way beyond what our competition has done with maybe one exception. Guys, most of the choir libraries don’t sound that great. Some do sound great. Sometimes it seems that some of you simply can’t hear the difference between a bad sounding library like that old Soundiron one that everyone loved and one of 8 Dio’s newer ones that sound good. I don’t know what to say about that. Some of this stuff has weird imaging, tons of noise reduction, tunnel sound, very little dynamics, vibrato that’s fighting itself, slow attacks etc.. That’s why I make a point about the sound. It’s an attempt to highlight a feature. It’s not used car talk. The best equipment available, great hall and singers and a great engineer with proper dynamics recorded pays off. If we use Shawn Murphy, guess what? It might be the best sounding..... Hollywood Choirs tries to do one thing better than everyone else. And that’s a hyper dynamic, word building, great sounding choir. It won’t sound great in every Acapella unless you really master WordBuilder, but in a piece of music it just works with no effort. And it has no equal in that respect.
> 
> Legato-wise this library is poor. We just did a couple quick things as an add on. But, in my experience, the word builder makes the library sound very real and connected. It lends a lot more realism than legato patches in most instances. Unless you just want a legato vowel sound, then there are much better options out there.
> 
> Staccato wise this library is poor. We chose not to focus on that at all. You can however use WordBuilder and play staccato and it sounds fine unless you want hyper aggressive and short stuff. Then your fkd.
> 
> If you dismiss the word building as a gimmick you are really missing out. Most choral music will greatly benefit from this feature. Because you have control over everything including dynamics and timing, wordbuilding is superior to prerecorded phrases or words. —- That is most of the time. If you base your composition off the feel and timing of a prerecorded phrase, it will probably sound great.
> 
> If you can only have one choir library, what do you choose?
> 
> The guy that started this thread is an a$$. Why? He accused us of buying reviews. F that guy. He smugly says we are lost in some time warp or some $hit. The internet is great until people with miniature John thomas’ Decide they are going to vomit over people that deserve a bit of respect. He didn’t quite get it. That’s fine. It will happen, but he should have spent the time that he took to make that disrespectful video on learning the product.
> 
> You can say whatever you want about me, but I have contributed a lot to the composer community. I love you guys and what we do. Do you think I needed to make this choir library. And share it? Nope. I wanted to complete my 20 year wordbuilding journey with something I could be proud of. Remember Voices Of The Apocalypse? Some of you speak like we are some kind of charlatans. It’s ridiculous. We made the most popular by a mile orchestral library ever - EWQLSO. People really liked and used this library for over a decade, some still use it. We made some of the most popular and deep ethnic products ever - Silk, Ra. We started the trend and made some great and hugely successful epic percussion libraries - SD 1-3. We made what was the best piano library at the time and is still great QL Pianos. Symphonic Choirs was massively successful and popular library in spite of its word building flaws. Virtual Instrument of the year for a reason. Also a trend setter. We made Hollywood Orchestra with the best talent out there including Sean Murphy and Thomas Bergersen. We spared no expense or effort, and in my opinion that library is the best complete orchestra there is to this day, along with Spitfire probably. We also made the best reverb for film composers there is - Spaces 2. You can’t dismiss all that when you talk about us. Thanks to everyone else who has been fair minded and reasonable.



This is the most convoluted, egotistical and frankly childishly personal reply I've ever seen from a developer towards a review with rather tame negative feedback. This is the real world, where people don't automatically agree with or support your vision. Resorting to insulting language against a reviewer and making a big deal out of a few things I said that weren't even that harsh, is quite unprofessional and displays the kind of rash behaviour sample developers need to avoid if they intend on keeping their customers happy and their reputation intact.

Standing on a soap box and claiming how incredibly awesome your company is, while spurting offensive comments to the reviewer, is disgusting. I've already maintained that the library has plenty of flaws - no amount of passive aggression will change that - but I also had some good things to say about it, which were clearly not good enough for you considering your attitude.

On a side note, many customers of EW are fans of Nick Phoenix's work on Stormdrum, Ra and the first two Hollywood libraries. It's not a stretch to claim that since Doug's still unexplained and vicious attack on Nick way back when, the quality of EW libraries has continually degraded. That wasn't my fault - it is the fault of those who compromised the relationship and flow that EW had going with Nick and his team.

Honestly, your reply speaks for itself so I have nothing else to say about it. I go by evidence only. I don't know you so I refuse to harbour any resentment towards you and I say these words with a general sense of respect for you as a human being - toughen up and don't let negative reviews get to you. If you're still consumed by the dilemma of negative customer feedback, post all you want. I'll let you have the last say, but it certainly won't stop or resolve any negative customer feedback or unwillingness to part with their money for the product in question.


----------



## StatKsn

One thing to note is that there are much more competitors now than then. Many EWQL libraries are a bit getting old, some more than 10 years old. In the past there may be a few people who "hated" EW because they can't pirate their library or things like that, but now there are so many alternatives that can be, technologically speaking, even better (not to mention that non-QL EW libraries are quite a bit behind). I have to say that, while Nick has been a very valuable contributor to the VI industry and I respect him, but EW/QL is not THAT important to the world. It is inevitable to get compared to more recent peers and we can move on if we don't like Play.


----------



## whiskers

X-Bassist said:


> So the reason you haven’t been hacked yet is because you haven’t released Play Pro? Updating play to pro or adding some extra keyswitch patches will suddenly make Play hackable?
> 
> I suppose I’m missing a link there that isn’t clearly evident (not sure how we got to hacking) but I’ll assume some trade secrets are involved.



Yeah, that part of the response to me makes no sense. I'm curious as to what Nick meant by that. I don't see how the development of play pro really has much to do with being or not being cracked (or hacked I suppose as they're calling it these days)


----------



## X-Bassist

whiskers said:


> Yeah, that part of the response to me makes no sense. I'm curious as to what Nick meant by that. I don't see how the development of play pro really has much to do with being or not being cracked (or hacked I suppose as they're calling it these da)


Not to put words in Nicks mouth, he may have a different line of thinking, but my guess is that he was resonding to the many questions they get about “why did East West leave Kontakt” yet, as before, doesn’t want to respond to questions about Pro Play, which in my mind is the next step, as opposed to going back to something like Kontakt (“and here’s why we can’t...”).

Avoiding speaking about Play Pro could be because they began development and found it too expensive or too bug laden to fix adequately and decided to quietly put in “on hold”. Or as some suggested in this thread used the idea to sell libraries and put off new buyers concerns (Play Pro is on it’s way!) yet couldn’t come up with enough financing to get it up and running (it happens). Many companies enjoy touting the best of what they have (or what’s to come) while staying mum about their mistakes. That’s what a PR department is for. 

Play does what it was intended to do without crashing, just getting to that point takes a lot of work (and a lot of money- I don’t think NI fee’s come close) so kudos. Just give us those few more options or a few more patches for those exceptional libaries that could really use it, or let us know Pro Play is dead, barely breathing, or about to have it’s first baby. Any one of the above is better then pretending something is on the horizon when it’s not. And if it’s all in the rear view mirror for you that’s fine too, just let us know so we can also move on and make the best of it. Thank you. Cheers.


----------



## JohnG

I really like Hollywood Choirs because it's so quick to get plausible results. The Wordbuilder works better than the original EWQL Symphonic Choirs because it puts most syllables where the composer intends without a lot of juggling. 

Mind you, I used the original on plenty of paying jobs but, for ease of use and greater flexibility, I do like the new one better most of the time. Those others who have both can agree, I think, that they sound pretty different.

I agree also with Nick that legato is overrated, not only for choirs but for sample libraries in general. I don't even like legato most of the time, and particularly for choirs. In choirs where I've sung, if the conductor hears anyone sliding from note to note, he's going to chastise, not congratulate the singer. And 99.9% of the time I detest portamento, unless it's an effect.

If I want super-aggressive staccato maybe Strezov or something else?

I'm fine with PLAY. Have had more problems with Kontakt than PLAY over the years, in aggregate. And this new Native Access drives me nuts.

Sometimes Nick uses a few potty words in a post. Doesn't bother me.

I'm grateful to all of them for what they do -- EW, Spitfire, Spectrasonics, u-he, Tonehammer/8dio/Soundiron, NI, ERA, Steven Slate, Matt Bowdler -- so many people working hard to create sounds to use. I love having them.

[Note: I have received free products from East West]


----------



## Parsifal666

JohnG said:


> I really like Hollywood Choirs because it's so quick to get plausible results. The Wordbuilder works better than the original EWQL Symphonic Choirs because it puts most syllables where the composer intends without a lot of juggling.
> 
> Mind you, I used the original on plenty of paying jobs but, for ease of use and greater flexibility, I do like the new one better most of the time. Those others who have both can agree, I think, that they sound pretty different.
> 
> I agree also with Nick that legato is overrated, not only for choirs but for sample libraries in general. I don't even like legato most of the time, and particularly for choirs. In choirs where I've sung, if the conductor hears anyone sliding from note to note, he's going to chastise, not congratulate the singer. And 99.9% of the time I detest portamento, unless it's an effect.
> 
> If I want super-aggressive staccato maybe Strezov or something else?
> 
> I'm fine with PLAY. Have had more problems with Kontakt than PLAY over the years, in aggregate. And this new Native Access drives me nuts.
> 
> Sometimes Nick uses a few potty words in a post. Doesn't bother me.
> 
> I'm grateful to all of them for what they do -- EW, Spitfire, u-he, T8dio/Soundiron, NI -- so many people working hard to create sounds to use. I love having them.
> 
> [Note: I have received free products from East West]



[Note: I have not received free products from East West]

Thank yee-haw somebody spoke up re: legato. To me that's not the selling point of _*any*_ library, I just don't use it that often to begin with, and a lot of the time the long patches work just fine! And not just in EW btw.

And I also agree about being grateful to all those developers. Samples today can at times be unbelievably inspiring; I remember when I first picked up Iceni I was overwhelmed by all the fantastic samples,...but that goes for the older libraries like the Hollywood series and Stormdrums, EWQLSCP as well.


----------



## StatKsn

While for choirs (outside of "mm-mm-mm" "ee-ee-ee" humming stuff) I don't hear much legatos, legato is still very important for many instruments. You can't produce too many flowing lines without that - you can't produce a realistic e-guitar performance without hammering on/pull-offs - well, you can't even make a decent EDM synth without a gliding legato.


----------



## Ashermusic

Cory Pelizzari said:


> This is the most convoluted, egotistical and frankly childishly personal reply I've ever seen from a developer towards a review with rather tame negative feedback. This is the real world, where people don't automatically agree with or support your vision. Resorting to insulting language against a reviewer and making a big deal out of a few things I said that weren't even that harsh, is quite unprofessional and displays the kind of rash behaviour sample developers need to avoid if they intend on keeping their customers happy and their reputation intact.
> 
> Standing on a soap box and claiming how incredibly awesome your company is, while spurting offensive comments to the reviewer, is disgusting. I've already maintained that the library has plenty of flaws - no amount of passive aggression will change that - but I also had some good things to say about it, which were clearly not good enough for you considering your attitude.
> 
> On a side note, many customers of EW are fans of Nick Phoenix's work on Stormdrum, Ra and the first two Hollywood libraries. It's not a stretch to claim that since Doug's still unexplained and vicious attack on Nick way back when, the quality of EW libraries has continually degraded. That wasn't my fault - it is the fault of those who compromised the relationship and flow that EW had going with Nick and his team.
> 
> Honestly, your reply speaks for itself so I have nothing else to say about it. I go by evidence only. I don't know you so I refuse to harbour any resentment towards you and I say these words with a general sense of respect for you as a human being - toughen up and don't let negative reviews get to you. If you're still consumed by the dilemma of negative customer feedback, post all you want. I'll let you have the last say, but it certainly won't stop or resolve any negative customer feedback or unwillingness to part with their money for the product in question.



So let me see: a guy spends countless hours utilizing his passion and vast experience and expertise, and money, puts out a product he believes in, and you find it surprising and reprehensible that he strongly defends it against a harsh and arguably incorrect review?

It is YOU that is not living in the real world, not Nick in my opinion.


----------



## JohnG

StatKsn said:


> legato is still very important for many instruments.



Actually, I think it's mostly important for -- instruments and situations for which it's important! You mention hammer-ons and pull-offs, and I agree -- they have to be good. Just like recorded trills. I agree 100% about electric guitar and could be convinced about synths too.

But not about orchestral instruments, where they are often unnecessary.

About 90% of the time if I actually hear my orchestral players playing with what some developers call "legato," I ask them not to do that again. I don't like hearing transitions most of the time.

Sometimes it can be awesome, unquestionably; we can all think of a solo French Horn / trumpet / flugel etc. line, or maybe some beautiful cello melody and yes, for that, legato is really nice. I really have been enjoying those Spitfire "Performance Legato" scripts on the strings, for example.

But, when it comes to legato samples, the amount of hair-pulling, hours of recording, and editing, and verbiage spilled wildly overweighs their attractiveness, to me at least.


----------



## Parsifal666

JohnG said:


> Actually, I think it's mostly important for -- instruments and situations for which it's important!
> 
> But not about orchestral instruments, where they *are* often unnecessary.
> 
> About 90% of the time if I actually hear my orchestral players playing with what some developers call "legato," I ask them not to do that again. I don't like hearing transitions most of the time.
> 
> Sometimes it can be awesome, unquestionably; we can all think of a solo French Horn / trumpet / flugel etc. line, or maybe some beautiful cello melody and yes, for that, legato is really nice. I really have been enjoying those Spitfire "Performance Legato" scripts on the strings, for example.
> 
> But, when it comes to legato samples, the amount of hair-pulling, hours of recording, and editing, and verbiage spilled wildly overweighs their attractiveness, to me at least.



I must again mention: there are quite a few "plain old" longs patches that can get you there just as nicely as "authentic legato" patches can. Some even moreseo.

I do like getting a nice legato ostinato in the woodwinds now and again. It just doesn't happen to be needed often. If there was even a library called, say, "Legato 2.0" the chances are good I wouldn't need it.

But wait, I just spent 700 US this year on a library I didn't need (Ark 1) so whadda I know?


----------



## Mike Greene

Ashermusic said:


> So let me see: a guy spends countless hours utilizing his passion and vast experience and expertise, and money, puts out a product he believes in, and you find it surprising and reprehensible that he strongly defends it against a harsh and arguably incorrect review?
> 
> It is YOU that is not living in the real world, not Nick in my opinion.


I like that Nick chimed in and I don't have a problem at all with his post or his language. He's a passionate guy, which probably has a lot to do with why his stuff (both music and EWQL products) is so great, and speaking for myself, if I see a Nick Phoenix post, I know it's going to be worth reading. The more Nick on the forum, the better.

At the same time, Cory is also well within bounds to respond as he did and I have no problem at all with that, either. In fact, I'll bet Nick expected nothing less. Cory may not have the credits Nick has, but he's no bozo and his reviews and postings are very valuable here. So agree with me or not, the official forum position (not just me, but other moderators) is that these guys are both fine and I don't want the thread to devolve into a discussion on etiquette.

There's some real meat in this discussion about Choirs, Play and other topics, so I don't want this to get derailed by side-discussion about who was out of line and who wasn't. So to keep things on topic, please refrain from posts that are about the personalities instead of the subject at hand.


----------



## zolhof

X-Bassist said:


> So the reason you haven’t been hacked yet is because you haven’t released Play Pro? Updating play to pro or adding some extra keyswitch patches will suddenly make Play hackable?



I think he meant the other way around? At least that's how I read his words, and please Nick, correct me if I'm wrong: at this point, EW would only prioritize Play Pro with all its bell$ and whi$tle$ to patch some serious hack or exploit - and then make all libraries require the new version.

Bummer for the user but they are a business after all.


----------



## whiskers

zolhof said:


> I think he meant the other way around? At least that's how I read his words, and please Nick, correct me if I'm wrong: at this point, EW would only prioritize Play Pro with all its bell$ and whi$tle$ to patch some serious hack or exploit - and then make all libraries require the new version.
> 
> Bummer for the user but they are a business after all.


Aah ok, that makes a lot more sense if he meant it that way. Unfortunate, but as you say, business.


----------



## X-Bassist

zolhof said:


> I think he meant the other way around? At least that's how I read his words, and please Nick, correct me if I'm wrong: at this point, EW would only prioritize Play Pro with all its bell$ and whi$tle$ to patch some serious hack or exploit - and then make all libraries require the new version.
> 
> Bummer for the user but they are a business after all.



Saying “we aren’t releasing play pro because we haven’t been hacked yet” is even more out there than what I thought. Play 6 has been released, there is always the ability to stop a hack (and require new libraries update) on any new version of Play, no need to add the bells and whistles. Which we are only talking about because they were touted, by Doug himself, as on it’s way. But as I said, I think they could drop pro like a rock if they added some more keyswitch patches.

Personally I’m glad to hear John is getting a lot of use out of Hollywood Choirs and can recommend it. The recordings and multiple mics sound good, even the updated wordbuilder is great news, since I get along fine with the one in SC.


----------



## MPortmann

Mike Greene said:


> Please refrain from posts that are about the personalities instead of the subject at hand.



These kind of posts are the most valueable ones. Thanks


----------



## Quantum Leap

Cory Pelizzari said:


> This is the most convoluted, egotistical and frankly childishly personal reply I've ever seen from a developer towards a review with rather tame negative feedback. This is the real world, where people don't automatically agree with or support your vision. Resorting to insulting language against a reviewer and making a big deal out of a few things I said that weren't even that harsh, is quite unprofessional and displays the kind of rash behaviour sample developers need to avoid if they intend on keeping their customers happy and their reputation intact.
> 
> Standing on a soap box and claiming how incredibly awesome your company is, while spurting offensive comments to the reviewer, is disgusting. I've already maintained that the library has plenty of flaws - no amount of passive aggression will change that - but I also had some good things to say about it, which were clearly not good enough for you considering your attitude.
> 
> On a side note, many customers of EW are fans of Nick Phoenix's work on Stormdrum, Ra and the first two Hollywood libraries. It's not a stretch to claim that since Doug's still unexplained and vicious attack on Nick way back when, the quality of EW libraries has continually degraded. That wasn't my fault - it is the fault of those who compromised the relationship and flow that EW had going with Nick and his team.
> 
> Honestly, your reply speaks for itself so I have nothing else to say about it. I go by evidence only. I don't know you so I refuse to harbour any resentment towards you and I say these words with a general sense of respect for you as a human being - toughen up and don't let negative reviews get to you. If you're still consumed by the dilemma of negative customer feedback, post all you want. I'll let you have the last say, but it certainly won't stop or resolve any negative customer feedback or unwillingness to part with their money for the product in question.



News alert. You are not a reviewer. You’re a bad hair model. Products degraded? I don’t know. I don’t agree. You accused EW of buying reviews which is BS. It’s a bad accusation. Kind of as bad as it gets. For all the things I have disagreed with Doug over, I know he doesn’t buy anything. It’s kind of the opposite. And you missed the point and huge upside of Hollywood Choirs. You just wanted to make your video. On the upside, at least you still have hair.


----------



## Quantum Leap

X-Bassist said:


> Saying “we aren’t releasing play pro because we haven’t been hacked yet” is even more out there than what I thought. Play 6 has been released, there is always the ability to stop a hack (and require new libraries update) on any new version of Play, no need to add the bells and whistles. Which we are only talking about because they were touted, by Doug himself, as on it’s way. But as I said, I think they could drop pro like a rock if they added some more keyswitch patches.
> 
> Personally I’m glad to hear John is getting a lot of use out of Hollywood Choirs and can recommend it. The recordings and multiple mics sound good, even the updated wordbuilder is great news, since I get along fine with the one in SC.



I guess I was rambling incoherently. I didn’t mean that about Play Pro. I just meant that we went with our own player to avoid NI and to protect our samples. Miraculously the copy protection worked. I really don’t have much to do with the workings at EW but I think there is something coming you might like. And yes, we have plenty of key switches, but just not complete ones because PLAY can’t handle the size of them.


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr

Cory Pelizzari said:


> This is the most convoluted, egotistical and frankly childishly personal reply I've ever seen from a developer towards a review with rather tame negative feedback. This is the real world, where people don't automatically agree with or support your vision. Resorting to insulting language against a reviewer and making a big deal out of a few things I said that weren't even that harsh, is quite unprofessional and displays the kind of rash behaviour sample developers need to avoid if they intend on keeping their customers happy and their reputation intact.
> 
> Standing on a soap box and claiming how incredibly awesome your company is, while spurting offensive comments to the reviewer, is disgusting. I've already maintained that the library has plenty of flaws - no amount of passive aggression will change that - but I also had some good things to say about it, which were clearly not good enough for you considering your attitude.
> 
> On a side note, many customers of EW are fans of Nick Phoenix's work on Stormdrum, Ra and the first two Hollywood libraries. It's not a stretch to claim that since Doug's still unexplained and vicious attack on Nick way back when, the quality of EW libraries has continually degraded. That wasn't my fault - it is the fault of those who compromised the relationship and flow that EW had going with Nick and his team.
> 
> Honestly, your reply speaks for itself so I have nothing else to say about it. I go by evidence only. I don't know you so I refuse to harbour any resentment towards you and I say these words with a general sense of respect for you as a human being - toughen up and don't let negative reviews get to you. If you're still consumed by the dilemma of negative customer feedback, post all you want. I'll let you have the last say, but it certainly won't stop or resolve any negative customer feedback or unwillingness to part with their money for the product in question.



Understood your point and I finally saw your review. One thing you shouldn´t do and accuse a company of buying reviews if you don´t have any proof for that. Otherwise it is just a claim and I can understand that then someone is pissed of when this is not true (I dont know if that is the case and honestly I don´t care about that). For the rest of your review I dont have any problem, that is the only thing. Even if you feel there might be something fishy for you, that doesn´t belong in a review imo. Just my few cents.


----------



## Parsifal666

Quantum Leap said:


> News alert. You are not a reviewer. You’re a bad hair model. Products degraded? I don’t know. I don’t agree. You accused EW of buying reviews which is BS. It’s a bad accusation. Kind of as bad as it gets. For all the things I have disagreed with Doug over, I know he doesn’t buy anything. It’s kind of the opposite. And you missed the point and huge upside of Hollywood Choirs. You just wanted to make your video. On the upside, at least you still have hair.



I'm surprised this turned into an ad hominem attack, however I respect QL and see how he was antagonized.


----------



## erica-grace

AlexanderSchiborr said:


> One thing you shouldn´t do and accuse a company of buying reviews if you don´t have any proof for that. Otherwise it is just a claim and I can understand that then someone is pissed of when this is not tru



Yeah - the review is not the problem. Accusing someone of unethical behavior without evidence to back up your claim, is, and is pretty low.

Cory - do you have evidence? If so, please present it. Either here, or on youtube as an addendum to your review video. If not, you need to be a man and apologize to EWQL. Not for the review, but fo the accusation.


----------



## X-Bassist

Quantum Leap said:


> And yes, we have plenty of key switches, but just not complete ones because PLAY can’t handle the size of them.



Thanks for this answer Nick, first time I’ve heard that Play can’t handle the size of bigger keyswitch patches. I realize admitting to this would be hard for East West, but if they had it would have answered some questions years ago. I appreciate your honesty.

Can’t agree with you about Cory. He’s decent reviewer and a real user, and I have yet to hear a review from him on anything I own that was not spot on. Perhaps he went a bit beyond review with the accusation of EW, but sinking so low as to comment on hair (espeically since it’s a sensitive issue for you, me, and many others) is a bit... in the worse way... high school. How about keeping the comments civil and something that stays on topic. As Mike mentioned, no personal attacks.

I think most people are looking for answers here, and I appreciate all that you are giving. With cool heads we can keep the convo to facts and advice, leaving out accusations and insults.

“I really don’t have much to do with the workings at EW but I think there is something coming you might like”

Perhaps on things to come we should all just wait and see. Although human nature usually pushes us to want to know what’s coming, personally I might have been better off never hearing about Play Pro. But thanks for trying to relay some good news (even if it’s just a hint). Enough for now.


----------



## artomatic

Quantum Leap said:


> News alert. You are not a reviewer. You’re a bad hair model. Products degraded? I don’t know. I don’t agree. You accused EW of buying reviews which is BS. It’s a bad accusation. Kind of as bad as it gets. For all the things I have disagreed with Doug over, I know he doesn’t buy anything. It’s kind of the opposite. And you missed the point and huge upside of Hollywood Choirs. You just wanted to make your video. On the upside, at least you still have hair.




Wow. I have been a customer since my first purchase (RA) all the way to the Hollywood series... but really? Totally dismayed by this response. Just sayin'.


----------



## StatKsn

Mike Greene said:


> I like that Nick chimed in and I don't have a problem at all with his post or his language.



I don't want to derail the discussion, but I honestly am surprised that you have no problem at all with Nick's languages like "a$$" "f- that guy" "bad hair" toward Cory. His posts have a lot of legit points, but personal attacks and juvenile languages were absolutely unnecessary when everybody else was mature and civil. It is not adding any value nor helping anybody - just devaluing the discussion.

I am not suggesting to censor the language - he is not attacking me anyway and a bit of language doesn't bother me that much. However, you are the admin and I just don't think that a forum for professionals should "officially" give an overly aggressive behavior a seal of approval. JMHO.


----------



## Mike Greene

StatKsn said:


> I don't want to derail the discussion, but I honestly am surprised that you have no problem at all with Nick's languages like "a$$" "f- that guy" "bad hair" toward Cory. His posts have a lot of legit points, but personal attacks and juvenile languages were absolutely unnecessary when everybody else was mature and civil. It is not adding any value nor helping anybody - just devaluing the discussion.
> 
> I am not suggesting to censor the language - he is not attacking me anyway and a bit of language doesn't bother me that much. However, you are the admin and I just don't think that a forum for professionals should "officially" give an overly aggressive behavior a seal of approval. JMHO.


I hear you, and I probably went too far when I said _"I don't have a problem at all with it."_ I was just making a point that given that the review was apparently somewhat negative (I haven't actually seen it), then Nick should be allowed some leeway in his response. His post was an honest one with a lot of great insight, so I don't want to start slapping hands over a few questionable words.

To be clear, if Cory were actually being personally attacked, that would be a different story, but Cory's a big boy, and I can't imagine him being devastated by a generic "f that guy" remark. Surely a reviewer must already be aware that the recipient of a lukewarm review is thinking "f that guy." It's not like the person saying it out loud changes anything. As to the hair remarks, knowing Nick, I think those were jokes. 

FWIW, Nick and I have also had a couple public disagreements over the years, and I've been on the receiving end of a jab or two myself, and ... okay, maybe I said a few things, too.  But the mods (years ago, not here) rightfully didn't edit a thing, because our discussions were good ones. I admire Nick's passion and accomplishments. I don't agree with everything he says, but I (and I think most everyone else) sure want to hear what he has to say, even if a rule or two gets bent along the way.

This is not to say that the forum is now officially declared a free-for-all for "f that guy" remarks. It definitely is not. But like with the "twat" episode, context is important. Admittedly, it's highly subjective, since it's impossible to define what exactly is okay and what isn't, because there are so many factors specific to any situation. The overall philosophy, though, is that although the preference is for civility, I don't want to discourage valuable posts by being too restrictive.


----------



## StatKsn

Yeah...? I don't know. If that was a joke, I fail to find a funny factor. To me, a joke is ultimately what a person being teased will benefit from. A pro wrestling rather than an assault. A win-win thing. The hair remark (with the context) looked like a creative insult, but who knows?

I understand and agree that you don't want to be too restrictive, though!


----------



## Quantum Leap

Everything I say is dead serious......long pause with death stare and no blinking. I get into trouble when I open my mouth quite often. Can’t understand why to this day. I used to consider myself diplomatic, but then I got overconfident I guess. Life’s a weird balance of confidence and utter insecurity. I’ve always been a trouble maker though. Since I was 5. Anyway this guy (the reviewer who shall not be named) would have been awesome as part of my Northern Enclosure cartoon. Would take about 5 seconds to capture that likeness. Maybe he would be holding a skewer with sizzling shrimp on it or something equally stupid. 
Everyone always tells me how I should behave as a developer, which I find odd and I ignore those comments entirely, so please ignore the following comments: As a reviewer, you have a responsibility to try and be fair and accurate. The reason is that your comments can ruin companies and lives. Not in this case, but generally that’s so. (Sh1t I forgot this guy was a hair model not a reviewer) If hair club for men actually worked for a publication and managed to get the “buying reviews” comment online, he would be fired instantly. Now I don’t want him fired, just flogged with a bag of raw shrimp and baby powder. Oh wait he has no job. Anyway, virtual instruments sometimes are tricky to operate and I guess you need a few minutes to figure out what Hollywood Choirs is all about. That’s my gripe. Dude just didn’t want to like it. He missed the point. As someone who writes a ton of choral music, I can tell you the library is top notch and actually super easy to use unless you are doing Acapella.


----------



## Mike Greene

I moved a few posts to this thread in the Drama Zone. Thoughts about the review or about Choirs or other relevant topics are of course welcome, but as I mentioned earlier, please refrain from posts and opinions about the principle participants of the thread. It's not helpful, and a roll call of third parties declaring whose side they're on turns this into a drama thread, which most people don't want.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

I hated Hollywood Choirs when I first started using it. But guess what? I pulled my head out of my ass and actually learned how to use it (yes, I actually read the manual ) and discovered it's awesomeness. Either you like it or you don't, simple. Been using EW stuff since the old Kompakt days, and Play has never given even a fraction of the grief that Kontakt has. And custom keyswitches? Don't care, never needed them....if you want that, use Cubase expression maps, problem solved. There's always going to by whiners and naysayers (guilty as charged), but that's the nature of the beast.

I think it's very cool that developers, like Nick, actually visit the forum and occasionally take the time to post. Don't like his "foul" language? Maybe go over to the Disney forum; this a forum for musicians, and it's all part of the shop talk (maybe I spent too much time on the road, I dunno). At least he took the time to post and interact.


----------



## desert

I’ma going to step in and say - EW had one of the best libraries of all times! One of the best libraries of all times!


----------



## MusicLabor

Divico said:


> Really? Thank you! Means a lot to me . Keep in mind that just one sentence in WB took me a loong time.


I have to say that however much time you took to produce that was worth the effort. It is astonishingly beautiful and realistic to my ears. Bravo!


----------



## arznable

I have also used it in one of my projects since I upgraded. It is quite difficult to program at times I have to admit. Here is an example I used it as background vocals for an epic song.


----------

