# Cinematic Studio Brass VS Spitfire Studio Brass



## Benjamin Duk (Dec 26, 2018)

Surprised there is no thread on this yet, but what are your thoughts?

If you had to choose now between Cinematic Studio Brass or Spitfire Studio Brass, which one would you get?


----------



## MA-Simon (Dec 26, 2018)

CSB


----------



## mventura (Dec 26, 2018)

Sounds like we need a shootout! Anyone care to share a midi file and have users post audio examples?


----------



## muziksculp (Dec 26, 2018)

Yes, I'm also surprised this topic has not been discussed yet.

Also take into consideration that Spitfire Studio Brass is also available in a Pro version. So, it depends which version you compare to CSB. I'm curious to know how they compare.


----------



## Benjamin Duk (Dec 26, 2018)

muziksculp said:


> Yes, I'm also surprised this topic has not been discussed yet.
> 
> Also take into consideration that Spitfire Studio Brass is also available in a Pro version. So, it depends which version you compare to CSB. I'm curious to know how they compare.



This is true, but you can just use Tree Mics to compare the bass library from Spitfire and CSB.


----------



## Consona (Dec 26, 2018)

I think SStB nailed the brass sound, even the tree 1 mic only sounds fantastic IMO.

CSB seems to be way more playable, but I like SStB sound more.

From what I've gathered while doing Raiders, Star Wars and Star Trek mock-ups, a lot of brass passages is actually not a legato playing, so for slower things SStB legato could be enough, while for everything else the great sounding shorts with TM patches should do the job.

Like you cannot stretch CSB shorts, but with SStB there should not be any problem making those brisk Williams shorts passages. But the SA demos sounded rather robotic when it comes to the short notes so I'm curious about user demos, maybe even with midi CC'd stretch slider to make it way more lively?..


----------



## Oliver (Dec 26, 2018)

CSB +1


----------



## muziksculp (Dec 26, 2018)

CSB seems to be the more popular library, judging by forum posts, and also user demos. I haven't heard SStB demos that I thought were impressive, but they do sound good.


----------



## Benjamin Duk (Dec 26, 2018)

I was thinking of getting the SStb base library at $150, but it seems that a lot of people would prefer to get CSB.


----------



## Consona (Dec 26, 2018)

I was listening to some demos with more instruments and SStB really turns rather "synthy and romplery" in those cases for some reason, but in walkthroughts when patches are played alone, it sounds way better.

I still need to hear more CSB demos, but the good thing is, the discount won't disappear so I have more time to evaluate, unlike with SStB whose sale ends tomorrow so if I ever buy it, it will be some next wishlist.


----------



## Britpack50 (Dec 26, 2018)

From listening to demos only, I think the CSB sounds polite and creamy but a bit 2D, but perhaps thats about production given it's a drier library. The SStB sounds more dynamic, with a greater palette, plus more instruments (Pro version)...CSB offers very good integration with strings and of course the great interface, playability.


----------



## Soprano_Sundays (Dec 26, 2018)

Still yet to hear any demos that sound convincing from Spitfire Studio Brass, although I like the stretch feature for the shorts.

Quite a few people posting good stuff in the Cinematic Studio Brass thread.

Would be interesting to hear the trumpets from Spitfire Studio Brass playing the Raiders march.


----------



## artomatic (Dec 26, 2018)

CSB


----------



## Zoot_Rollo (Dec 26, 2018)

the more i play with it, the more i like SStBPro.

my first traditional Spitfire library - learning curve.

and only $299 - until tomorrow.


----------



## djrustycans (Dec 26, 2018)

Consona said:


> I think SStB nailed the brass sound, even the tree 1 mic only sounds fantastic IMO.
> 
> CSB seems to be way more playable, but I like SStB sound more.
> 
> ...



Totally agree regarding sound. I instantly loved the sound of SStB compared with CSB but it’s the programming of one versus the other which bothers me. I’m going to jump on SStB whist the pricing is good and worry about getting CSB (which I definitely will) later on seeing as the special price has no time limit.


----------



## Zoot_Rollo (Dec 26, 2018)

djrustycans said:


> Totally agree regarding sound. I instantly loved the sound of SStB compared with CSB but it’s the programming of one versus the other which bothers me. I’m going to jump on SStB whist the pricing is good and worry about getting CSB (which I definitely will) later on seeing as the special price has no time limit.



that's the great thing about Cinematic.

i have Cinematic Strings 2 - LOVE IT!

crossgrade price for CSB 'forever'.


----------



## Soprano_Sundays (Dec 26, 2018)

djrustycans said:


> Totally agree regarding sound. I instantly loved the sound of SStB compared with CSB but it’s the programming of one versus the other which bothers me. I’m going to jump on SStB whist the pricing is good and worry about getting CSB (which I definitely will) later on seeing as the special price has no time limit.



Really? Are there any demos that have convinced you of the sound? I’ve listened to the ones I can find and don’t find them very convincing at all. 

If anything I would say CSB has a more convincing sound from the examples I’ve heard.


----------



## jbuhler (Dec 26, 2018)

Soprano_Sundays said:


> Really? Are there any demos that have convinced you of the sound? I’ve listened to the ones I can find and don’t find them very convincing at all.
> 
> If anything I would say CSB has a more convincing sound from the examples I’ve heard.


I've liked the sound of SStB in all of the contextual demos I heard. CSB sounds very good, too, though the tone is not really to my taste, though I certainly wouldn't mind working with it. (I feel the same about CSS and I think it's fine that others love the tone as it's rather like comparing the tone of different professional orchestras. One sound really doesn't fit all.) The price of CSB is also higher (at the core level) and, more importantly to me, it doesn't have the additional instruments that are in the SStB Pro. That's the other main reason CSB doesn't really interest me. Most people probably don't care about those other instruments and that is fine too!


----------



## djrustycans (Dec 26, 2018)

Soprano_Sundays said:


> Really? Are there any demos that have convinced you of the sound? I’ve listened to the ones I can find and don’t find them very convincing at all.
> 
> If anything I would say CSB has a more convincing sound from the examples I’ve heard.



I prefer the sound of the recordings with SStB, not the realism. I have and really love CSS but don’t particularly like the sound of the room. It’s the same situation with CSB but in terms of programming and realism, I’ve loved most of what I’ve heard. Regarding the SStB demos, there are things I don’t like in all of them regarding realism but it may just be down to the usage in those particular situations. I’ve just bought SStB Pro and SStS Pro - downloading now!


----------



## Zoot_Rollo (Dec 26, 2018)

djrustycans said:


> Regarding the SStB demos, there are things I don’t like in all of them regarding realism but it may just be down to the usage in those particular situations. I’ve just bought SStB Pro and SStS Pro - downloading now!



i think the demos are selling SStB short.

comparing with my other Brassies (HWBD, VSL, Arks), 

i am slowly getting the hang of SStB, each time i spend more time dialing it in, the happier i get.

takeaway: Hollywood Brass Diamond ROCKS!


----------



## Hanu_H (Dec 26, 2018)

Consona said:


> I think SStB nailed the brass sound, even the tree 1 mic only sounds fantastic IMO.
> 
> CSB seems to be way more playable, but I like SStB sound more.
> 
> ...


So you think that 4 different recorded shorts is not better than one staccato with TM? 

-Hannes


----------



## Zoot_Rollo (Dec 26, 2018)

Hanu_H said:


> So you think that 4 different recorded shorts is not better than one staccato with TM?
> 
> -Hannes



this?






nice instrument list too.






lots of great stuff in this one.


----------



## Soprano_Sundays (Dec 26, 2018)

djrustycans said:


> I prefer the sound of the recordings with SStB, not the realism. I have and really love CSS but don’t particularly like the sound of the room. It’s the same situation with CSB but in terms of programming and realism, I’ve loved most of what I’ve heard. Regarding the SStB demos, there are things I don’t like in all of them regarding realism but it may just be down to the usage in those particular situations. I’ve just bought SStB Pro and SStS Pro - downloading now!



It would be great to hear some more user demos of SStB! At the moment having listened to a lot of demos of other brass libraries I'm struggling to see what SStB is offering that is better.

If anyone can post a clip of the trumpets playing the Raiders March that would be great as that has been done a fair bit with CSB.


----------



## djrustycans (Dec 26, 2018)

Soprano_Sundays said:


> It would be great to hear some more user demos of SStB! At the moment having listened to a lot of demos of other brass libraries I'm struggling to see what SStB is offering that is better.
> 
> If anyone can post a clip of the trumpets playing the Raiders March that would be great as that has been done a fair bit with CSB.



Will do but not before tomorrow!!


----------



## Hanu_H (Dec 26, 2018)

Zoot_Rollo said:


> this?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Don't really understand what this has to do with my comment. What I got from Consona's post that he is bummed that CSB doesn't have TM shorts. I just pointed out that instead of TM, CSB has 4 different shorts already.

-Hannes


----------



## Zoot_Rollo (Dec 26, 2018)

Hanu_H said:


> Don't really understand what this has to do with my comment. What I got from Consona's post that he is bummed that CSB doesn't have TM shorts. I just pointed out that instead of TM, CSB has 4 different shorts already.
> 
> -Hannes



SStB Pro has other shorts as well, beyond TM.

sorry if i wasn't clear, or if this is off base, or if you knew that already.


----------



## Hanu_H (Dec 26, 2018)

Zoot_Rollo said:


> SStB Pro has other shorts as well, beyond TM.
> 
> sorry if i wasn't clear, or if this is off base, or if you knew that already.


Yes, I knew it. SStB is missing staccato when comparing to CSB.

-Hannes


----------



## Geoff Grace (Dec 26, 2018)

My impression is that these are complimentary libraries. Where one is weak, the other is strong; and vice versa. Together, their combined price is roughly the same as a typical high-end brass library was just a few years ago. Might be worth getting both.

Best,

Geoff


----------



## Zoot_Rollo (Dec 26, 2018)

Hanu_H said:


> Yes, I knew it. SStB is missing staccato when comparing to CSB.
> 
> -Hannes



the Staccatissimo is pretty good with the tightness control.


----------



## Benjamin Duk (Dec 26, 2018)

So since SStb is on an introductory offer. Do you think I should maybe get the Core library to try out for $150?


----------



## Zoot_Rollo (Dec 26, 2018)

Benjamin Duk said:


> So since SStb is on an introductory offer. Do you think I should maybe get the Core library to try out for $150?



i think Pro really shines with the different mics and mixes especially.

plus twice the instrumentation.


----------



## Benjamin Duk (Dec 26, 2018)

Zoot_Rollo said:


> i think Pro really shines with the different mics and mixes especially.
> 
> plus twice the instrumentation.



The thing is, if I don't like the sound of the core library, I'm not going to like the Pro with all the other mic setups and instruments :D


----------



## Zoot_Rollo (Dec 26, 2018)

Benjamin Duk said:


> The thing is, if I don't like the sound of the core library, I'm not going to like the Pro with all the other mic setups and instruments :D



true.

i just think the Core may sell it short.

and at $299 for another day, it's a value to consider.


----------



## Benjamin Duk (Dec 26, 2018)

Ok here's another question. If I want to do more delicate stuff that builds with Chords and softer Horn and Trumpet melody lines, which library is more suited to that style?


----------



## Consona (Dec 26, 2018)

Hanu_H said:


> So you think that 4 different recorded shorts is not better than one staccato with TM?
> 
> -Hannes


Well, listen to the Star Wars examples. 4 different recorded shorts with no ability to edit the kontakt instrument or strech the samples just isn't enough.

Even with CineBrass I can go to the editing page and shorten the 1/8 notes' envelope so they sound way more like the SW examples. With CSB you cannot do that, with SStB you have TM patches, which is even better than editing envelope. (I'd like to switch CB to time machine pro mode, but it doesn't work, dunno why.)


----------



## kevthurman (Dec 26, 2018)

Geoff Grace said:


> My impression is that these are complimentary libraries. Where one is weak, the other is strong; and vice versa. Together, their combined price is roughly the same as a typical high-end brass library was just a few years ago. Might be worth getting both.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Geoff


What advantages does SStB offer to complement CSB?


----------



## Zoot_Rollo (Dec 26, 2018)

kevthurman said:


> What advantages does SStB offer to complement CSB?



and vice versa?


----------



## kevthurman (Dec 26, 2018)

After doing a bit of research in other threads and on the spitfire site (as much research as one can do without getting down and dirty with the actual library), it seems to me that they serve different purposes really. 

From what I've seen, it looks like spitfire is for you if you:

-write mostly hybrid scores where mixing flexibility is a must
-write music that isn't very traditional and is more progressive/contemporary. (think composers like John Powell or James Newton Howard rather than John Williams)
-would rather have more timbres to work with (cimbasso, picc trumpet, euphonium, cbass trombone, cbass tuba)
SStB's dry nature and utilities would serve it well in the mixing of the tracks themselves and is pretty effective at the most common sounds used in trailer music and hybrid scores. The low brass are good at stabs and strong sustains, the horns are generally pretty loud and brassy, and the trumpets are pretty good at shorts and repeated shorts. While both are very playable out-of-the-box, it seems SStB is really really consistent. (maybe a bit _too_ consistent, but to each their own!)

CSB is for you if you:

-Write more traditional music. You need realism, but flexibility in mixing is not a priority.
-Need good legato and solo instrument sounds across _all sections_. (many libraries neglect especially the trombones and tubas and CSB gets this right. To my ears, only Berlin Brass is better, but at double the price, it's not in the same bracket as these two)
-Write a lot of exposed brass chorales and solos. You want smooth and realistic transitions from note to note, so as not to distract the listener with an obviously "programmed" sound
CSB, much liks CSS, sports very realistic articulations, _especially_ the legato, which is about as smooth as realistic players. It also includes the realistic re-tonguing on the legato patches (one of the biggest features of cinematic studio IMO). It comes with a bit less in terms of mic positions, and a bit more baked-in reverb than SStB, but is miles ahead in terms of realism and expressive qualities.


----------



## Zoot_Rollo (Dec 26, 2018)

kevthurman said:


> After doing a bit of research in other threads and on the spitfire site (as much research as one can do without getting down and dirty with the actual library), it seems to me that they serve different purposes really.
> 
> From what I've seen, it looks like spitfire is for you if you:
> 
> ...



to confirm, you haven't actually played either VI?


----------



## Geoff Grace (Dec 27, 2018)

kevthurman said:


> What advantages does SStB offer to complement CSB?


CSB covers only the most used brass instruments, whereas SStB (Pro) has an extensive list of instruments and articulations. Judging on this aspect alone, I would buy the pro version of SStB over CSB.



Zoot_Rollo said:


> and vice versa?


All of the VI-Control Cinematic Studio Brass threads show widespread agreement about how remarkably playable CSB is. I can't recall any Spitfire products that have been praised that extensively for their playability. Mind you, I'm not saying that Spitfire libraries aren't playable, only that playability isn't the top quality the Spitfire is known for. Judging on this aspect alone, I would buy CSB over any version of SStB.

If both variety and playability are important to you, I think you'd like to consider owning both of these libraries.



Geoff Grace said:


> My impression is that these are complimentary libraries. Where one is weak, the other is strong; and vice versa. Together, their combined price is roughly the same as a typical high-end brass library was just a few years ago. Might be worth getting both.


I haven't played either library; but I am strongly considering purchasing both, based on my ears, needs, and what I've read so far.

Best,

Geoff


----------



## germancomponist (Dec 27, 2018)

What I wrote in the other thread:
"When your ears are trained, you can hear the tempi in which the short notes were recorded. If your library's short notes are still too long, you can record and bounce a passage at exactly the same tempo that they were recorded, then time-stretch it, and finally cut the shorter notes and push them there to get them in the right place. This works wonderfully in Cubase with all sample libraries.

Edit: To find out the original tempo just record the midi and move the tempo up and down. Your ears will tell you ...... . "


----------



## Zoot_Rollo (Dec 27, 2018)

Geoff Grace said:


> I haven't played either library;



I think Spitfire Studio Brass Pro for $299 is a great value - for one more day.

My initial issues wound up being due to my learning curve with the Spitfire UI in general as this was my first traditional library from them.

Today, I'll be buying Spitfire Studio Strings Professional based on my experience with Spitfire Studio Brass Professional.

With this, the free LABS instruments, and the extremely creative and inspiring EVO products, I can now see why people like Spitfire so much.

I have Cinematic Strings 2, while limited with articulations, it has some of the best tones I've heard and used. This gives me a very generous cross-grade path to CSB. Perhaps down the line.

All these developers are stellar and treat their customers phenomenally well.


----------



## Hanu_H (Dec 27, 2018)

Consona said:


> Well, listen to the Star Wars examples. 4 different recorded shorts with no ability to edit the kontakt instrument or strech the samples just isn't enough.
> 
> Even with CineBrass I can go to the editing page and shorten the 1/8 notes' envelope so they sound way more like the SW examples. With CSB you cannot do that, with SStB you have TM patches, which is even better than editing envelope. (I'd like to switch CB to time machine pro mode, but it doesn't work, dunno why.)


Hmm. What I've heard, CSB sounds way superior in the style of Star Wars than SStB. The sound of the shorts is a lot better and the legatos are just beautiful.

-Hannes


----------



## bc3po (Dec 27, 2018)

Benjamin Duk said:


> Ok here's another question. If I want to do more delicate stuff that builds with Chords and softer Horn and Trumpet melody lines, which library is more suited to that style?


Also interested in this question?


----------



## MA-Simon (Dec 27, 2018)

bc3po said:


> Also interested in this question?


Absolutely nonsensical question. How would you even answer that? It's 99 in what you write your lines for.
Edit: Sorry did not want to come of as harsh. Just trust in your writing the libraries will do the rest. Obvioustly Spitfire Studio Brass will be more dry and old, and CSB more dynamic and fresh.


----------



## Benjamin Duk (Dec 27, 2018)

MA-Simon said:


> Absolutely nonsensical question. How would you even answer that? It's 99 in what you write your lines for.
> Edit: Sorry did not want to come of as harsh. Just trust in your writing the libraries will do the rest. Obvioustly Spitfire Studio Brass will be more dry and old, and CSB more dynamic and fresh.



I don't think it's a nonsensical question because different libraries offer different dynamic ranges and some libraries tend to sound very brassy/harsh when played at P / MP levels.


----------



## Henu (Dec 27, 2018)

MA-Simon said:


> Spitfire Studio Brass will be more dry and *old*, and CSB more dynamic and *fresh*.



Uhm, why exactly CSB sounds obviously more "fresh" than Spitfire Studio Brass?


----------



## Hanu_H (Dec 27, 2018)

Henu said:


> Uhm, why exactly CSB sounds obviously more "fresh" than Spitfire Studio Brass?


Yeah, I don't get that either. I think CSB has a classic movie sound and SStB is more dry and modern sounding.

-Hannes


----------



## bc3po (Dec 27, 2018)

MA-Simon said:


> Absolutely nonsensical question. How would you even answer that? It's 99 in what you write your lines for.
> Edit: Sorry did not want to come of as harsh. Just trust in your writing the libraries will do the rest. Obvioustly Spitfire Studio Brass will be more dry and old, and CSB more dynamic and fresh.


Not nonsensical to me. I don’t have a library that does this well. Cinebrass and spitfire symphonic brass don’t do quiet trombones well. It’s very hard to demo chordal brass passages well when the trombones won’t shut up and play quieter than mf. As a matter of fact, the only trombones I’ve ever played that have done this well are Hans’ custom samples. I’ve yet to find a commercial library.


----------



## brenneisen (Dec 27, 2018)

bc3po said:


> I’ve yet to find a commercial library.



Berlin?


----------



## Hanu_H (Dec 27, 2018)

bc3po said:


> Not nonsensical to me. I don’t have a library that does this well. Cinebrass and spitfire symphonic brass don’t do quiet trombones well. It’s very hard to demo chordal brass passages well when the trombones won’t shut up and play quieter than mf. As a matter of fact, the only trombones I’ve ever played that have done this well are Hans’ custom samples. I’ve yet to find a commercial library.


I found this example from CSB discussion:


You should also listen the Christmas Morning from CSB website.

-Hannes


----------



## Benjamin Duk (Dec 27, 2018)

bc3po said:


> Not nonsensical to me. I don’t have a library that does this well. Cinebrass and spitfire symphonic brass don’t do quiet trombones well. It’s very hard to demo chordal brass passages well when the trombones won’t shut up and play quieter than mf. As a matter of fact, the only trombones I’ve ever played that have done this well are Hans’ custom samples. I’ve yet to find a commercial library.



This is exactly why I mean!


----------



## Zoot_Rollo (Dec 27, 2018)

Hanu_H said:


> Hmm. What I've heard, CSB sounds way superior in the style of Star Wars than SStB. The sound of the shorts is a lot better and the legatos are just beautiful.
> 
> -Hannes



Star Wars is not a selling point for me.

Quite the opposite, actually.


----------



## Consona (Dec 27, 2018)

Hanu_H said:


> Hmm. What I've heard, CSB sounds way superior in the style of Star Wars than SStB. The sound of the shorts is a lot better and the legatos are just beautiful.
> 
> -Hannes


May be, but the shorts sound nothing like those from SW.


----------



## kevthurman (Dec 27, 2018)

Zoot_Rollo said:


> to confirm, you haven't actually played either VI?


I have CSB.


----------



## Soprano_Sundays (Dec 27, 2018)

MA-Simon said:


> Absolutely nonsensical question. How would you even answer that? It's 99 in what you write your lines for.
> Edit: Sorry did not want to come of as harsh. Just trust in your writing the libraries will do the rest. Obvioustly Spitfire Studio Brass will be more dry and old, and CSB more dynamic and fresh.



Not a nonsensical question at all. Different libraries do different things well. If you want to write exposed Brass Chorales then you'll most probably want good transitions. If you are layering instruments, then those might not be as important and you might want a library with more variety and playability.


----------



## kevthurman (Dec 27, 2018)

Soprano_Sundays said:


> Not a nonsensical question at all. Different libraries do different things well. If you want to write exposed Brass Chorales then you'll most probably want good transitions. If you are layering instruments, then those might not be as important and you might want a library with more variety and playability.


Indeed. I find that many libraries with bumpy transitions and unnatural sustains are simply unusable in exposed, sentimental solo and chorale writing. The "roboticness" of the library distracts the listener from enjoying the music itself.


----------



## jbuhler (Dec 27, 2018)

Zoot_Rollo said:


> Star Wars is not a selling point for me.
> 
> Quite the opposite, actually.


Many seem not to get that it's not one library to rule them all, that the libraries, like real orchestras, are optimized for different things, and even if they can all handle a certain set of sounds, they still come with inflections that reflect taste and aesthetics rather than absolutes. Then, too, Paul's demo showed in context that SStB can handle the Williams thing just fine. It may not be the one that I personally prefer, but it is completely credible and so useable if I need to do that thing. 

It's also slightly bizarre to fetishize that sound and that capability to such a large degree and to not consider how the ability to render that sound bakes real limitations into a library. Cool, now I have a set of libraries that allows me to mock-up John Williams' scores with complete fidelity. I rule! 
.
.
.
.
.
.




.
.
.
.
I guess the market for John Williams' mock-ups is not what I thought.
.
.
.
I say this as someone who is currently working on a mock-up of a John Williams' cue, so I don't think the task itself is ridiculous or wrongheaded, since you learn a lot doing it. But the way it drives these conversations is a little odd.


----------



## Consona (Dec 27, 2018)

jbuhler said:


> It's also slightly bizarre to fetishize that sound and that capability to such a large degree and to not consider how the ability to render that sound bakes real limitations into a library. Cool, now I have a set of libraries that allows me to mock-up John Williams' scores with complete fidelity. I rule!


But this is not the point. The point is, if a library can handle Williams, you know it will most probably handle any musical idea you come up with.


----------



## Soprano_Sundays (Dec 27, 2018)

jbuhler said:


> Many seem not to get that it's not one library to rule them all, that the libraries, like real orchestras, are optimized for different things, and even if they can all handle a certain set of sounds, they still come with inflections that reflect taste and aesthetics rather than absolutes. Then, too, Paul's demo showed in context that SStB can handle the Williams thing just fine. It may not be the one that I personally prefer, but it is completely credible and so useable if I need to do that thing.
> 
> It's also slightly bizarre to fetishize that sound and that capability to such a large degree and to not consider how the ability to render that sound bakes real limitations into a library. Cool, now I have a set of libraries that allows me to mock-up John Williams' scores with complete fidelity. I rule!
> .
> ...



I think it's just a good measuring point as its fantastic brass writing.


----------



## kevthurman (Dec 27, 2018)

Soprano_Sundays said:


> I think it's just a good measuring point as its fantastic brass writing.


Yeah, because if it can handle such difficult brass writing, it's probably going to be able to handle most things. It isn't "one library to rule them all" but a library that can handle the wide range of dynamics, timbres, articulations, and transitions demanded by the music of star wars for example is bound to be an inherently flexible and realistic-sounding library. Also, using something familiar as a benchmark is a good way to show the weaknesses and strengths of the library. Difficult brass parts quickly expose poor legato scripting, or synthy shorts, or inconsistent intonation, etc... And these things are easier to hear when you already know what it should sound like.


----------



## Hanu_H (Dec 27, 2018)

Zoot_Rollo said:


> Star Wars is not a selling point for me.
> 
> Quite the opposite, actually.


Yeah, not for me either but Consona brought it up.



Consona said:


> May be, but the shorts sound nothing like those from SW.


I have heard some examples but maybe you can give me a link what you are meaning?

-Hannes


----------



## jbuhler (Dec 27, 2018)

Consona said:


> But this is not the point. The point is, if a library can handle Williams, you know it will most probably handle any musical idea you come up with.


Really, this is completely untrue. A library optimized for Williams—and we're not talking about all Williams but a very limited subset that routinely gets trotted out in these examples but even if you took the full Williams—would have severe limitations and be less effective at rendering a lot of current brass writing in film and games. Now you might not like that sound, and a Williams' optimized brass might be able to handle it ok, but that is an entirely different question. A library that sucked at rendering Williams might easily excel at rendering another sound.


----------



## kevthurman (Dec 27, 2018)

jbuhler said:


> Really, this is completely untrue. A library optimized for Williams—and we're not talking about all Williams but a very limited subset that routinely gets trotted out in these examples but even if you took the full Williams—would have severe limitations and be less effective at rendering a lot of current brass writing in film and games. Now you might not like that sound, and a Williams' optimized brass might be able to handle it ok, but that is an entirely different question. A library that sucked at rendering Williams might easily excel at rendering another sound.


I would assume that people that want a library that can handle Williams' greatest hits know what they're looking for as far as a sound. "current" brass writing depends on the individual. I really do need flexible, convincing sounding brass and scores like star wars and indiana jones are very useful for exposing where a library is weak. It makes it easy to determing which libraries are good for plugging which holes in my music.


----------



## kevthurman (Dec 27, 2018)

It's also important to figure out which libraries are most flexible if you're on a budget. CSB is a great example of a library which is really cheap for all its flexibility, as I personally cannot afford a ton of brass libraries, and every purchase counts.


----------



## Zoot_Rollo (Dec 27, 2018)

kevthurman said:


> It's also important to figure out which libraries are most flexible if you're on a budget. CSB is a great example of a library which is really cheap for all its flexibility, as I personally cannot afford a ton of brass libraries, and every purchase counts.



This certainly makes a case for CSB, more so than any style argument.

I am fortunate to be able to add SStS Pro as a 'fine point' to the libraries I already own.


----------



## ism (Dec 27, 2018)

jbuhler said:


> Really, this is completely untrue. A library optimized for Williams—and we're not talking about all Williams but a very limited subset that routinely gets trotted out in these examples but even if you took the full Williams—would have severe limitations and be less effective at rendering a lot of current brass writing in film and games. Now you might not like that sound, and a Williams' optimized brass might be able to handle it ok, but that is an entirely different question. A library that sucked at rendering Williams might easily excel at rendering another sound.




A clearer example might be the Tina Guo cello. It sounds just like a Tina Guo, or a certain subset of her ‘greatest hits’. But it’s generally easy to grasp from the demo that what your getting is this one performance style baked right into the samples for maximum ‘playability’. Which is a lovely, but an extremely tiny sliver of the expressive capacity of a cellist (Although judging from a few angry YouTube comments, not everyone had quite grasped this when they bought it).

More difficult to grasp is CSS, and especially CSSS, and it took me quite a lot of effort to glean from the demos exactly what was baked it to is sound and what dimensions of expressiveness this leaves you able to perform. Lots to love about that sound and the ease of which it lets you realize that sound. But in that a relatively naive listener like my self can listen to the demo and hear ‘realistic’ strings, the perception of ‘realistic’ here becomes a fetishization of one particular sound.

CSSS is of course much more versatile than Tina Guo, and better at the CSSS sound than anything else (more or less by definition). So it’s much harder to work out where baked in performance end and performability begins. But it’s much the same question.

Meanwhile, libraries that don’t bake in a style to the same extent - that force you, by design, to use the modwheel for instance, are often compared via ‘neutral’ midi data. Which is deeply unhelpful. (As is the concept of ‘neutrality’ in general, but that’s another rant entirely).

(Sorry, I know this is brass thread, but not knowing anything about brass I’m trying to adapt what I’ve been able to work out about string libraries. But I think it’s much the same issue in brass that we have in strings, only maybe even more subtle, so maybe drawing a comparison with stings might be clarifying?)


----------



## jbuhler (Dec 27, 2018)

kevthurman said:


> Yeah, because if it can handle such difficult brass writing, it's probably going to be able to handle most things.


This is again false, or at least depends on your definition of "difficult" and what is being optimized under its definition. Williams does not encompass the entirety of brass writing, not even close, and certainly not with the restricted Williams that comes up in these conversations. 

That said, if you want to use the ability of a library to execute those passages as your criteria to decide on brass libraries that's of course entirely your prerogative, and if it works for you that's great. It doesn't work for me.


----------



## Zoot_Rollo (Dec 27, 2018)

ism said:


> A clearer example might be the Tina Guo cello. It sounds just like a Tina Guo, or a certain subset of her ‘greatest hits’. But it’s generally easy to grasp from the demo that what your getting is this one performance style baked right into the samples for maximum ‘playability’. (Although judging from a few angry YouTube comments, not everyone had quite grasped this when they bought it).
> 
> More difficult to grasp is CSS, and especially CSSS, and it took me quite a lot of effort to glean from the demos exactly what was baked it to is sound and what dimensions of expressiveness this leaves you able to perform. Lots to love about that sound and the ease of which it lets you realize that sound. But in that a relatively naive listener like my self can listen to the demo and hear ‘realistic’ strings, the perception of ‘realistic’ becomes a fetishization of one particular sound.
> 
> ...



that reminds me,

Tina Guo was due for an update.


----------



## kevthurman (Dec 27, 2018)

jbuhler said:


> This is again false, or at least depends on your definition of "difficult" and what is being optimized under its definition. Williams does not encompass the entirety of brass writing, not even close, and certainly not with the restricted Williams that comes up in these conversations.
> 
> That said, if you want to use the ability of a library to execute those passages as your criteria to decide on brass libraries that's of course entirely your prerogative, and if it works for you that's great. It doesn't work for me.


What I mean by "difficult" here is that it's really difficult to program brass to convincingly pull off such music. A lot of it is even quite difficult for live players. Mockups of the indiana jones theme or the star wars theme for example expose libraries which might sound disjointed and unnatural. There was a thread somewhere on here which used a cue from north by northwest (bernard hermann) which was very helpful in demonstrating how a library without round robin sampling can sound "synthy" and seems to have been very helpful to people.


----------



## jbuhler (Dec 27, 2018)

kevthurman said:


> I really do need flexible, convincing sounding brass and scores like star wars and indiana jones are very useful for exposing where a library is weak. It makes it easy to determing which libraries are good for plugging which holes in my music.


If those are the holes in your brass libraries, then I imagine those passages would be good evaluating the library that will help you plug them. They are not my holes.


----------



## jbuhler (Dec 27, 2018)

kevthurman said:


> What I mean by "difficult" here is that it's really difficult to program brass to convincingly pull off such music. A lot of it is even quite difficult for live players. Mockups of the indiana jones theme or the star wars theme for example expose libraries which might sound disjointed and unnatural. There was a thread somewhere on here which used a cue from north by northwest (bernard hermann) which was very helpful in demonstrating how a library without round robin sampling can sound "synthy" and seems to have been very helpful to people.


I think the libraries in that example weren't programmed well for the library, because it sounded nothing like I would have gotten out of the libraries I owned that were included, but whatever.


----------



## jbuhler (Dec 27, 2018)

ism said:


> (Sorry, I know this is brass thread, but not knowing anything about brass I’m trying to adapt what I’ve been able to work out about string libraries. But I think it’s much the same issue in brass that we have in string, only maybe even more subtle, so maybe drawing a comparison with stings might be clarifying?)


I find this a very illuminating comparison!


----------



## ism (Dec 27, 2018)

jbuhler said:


> I find this a very illuminating comparison!



As is the concept of fetishizing a sound. I’d worked out the basic idea, but just never though to apply the formal concept. Hmm, I predict it’s an notion going to get quite a bit of use from myself ...


----------



## Soprano_Sundays (Dec 27, 2018)

jbuhler said:


> Really, this is completely untrue. A library optimized for Williams—and we're not talking about all Williams but a very limited subset that routinely gets trotted out in these examples but even if you took the full Williams—would have severe limitations and be less effective at rendering a lot of current brass writing in film and games. Now you might not like that sound, and a Williams' optimized brass might be able to handle it ok, but that is an entirely different question. A library that sucked at rendering Williams might easily excel at rendering another sound.



Could you give some examples of current brass writing? Would be useful to know exactly what writing wouldn't translate? And what you are looking for?


----------



## jbuhler (Dec 27, 2018)

ism said:


> As is the concept of fetishizing a sound. I’d worked out the basic idea, but just never though to apply the formal concept. Hmm, I predict it’s an notion going to get quite a bit of use from myself ...


I would be happy if we could turn the conversation from the absolutes of better and worse ("if the library can't do X it sucks") and toward considerations of tradeoffs in the libraries, as you've done so effectively for the solo string libraries. I actually find those observations more helpful in making a buying decision as well as to understanding the design and potential functionality of a library.


----------



## Soprano_Sundays (Dec 27, 2018)

Also I think it is important to add that brass sampling hasn't necessarily peaked yet. So having conventional demos is useful in assessing them.


----------



## Soprano_Sundays (Dec 27, 2018)

jbuhler said:


> I would be happy if we could turn the conversation from the absolutes of better and worse ("if the library can't do X it sucks") and toward considerations of tradeoffs in the libraries, as you've done so effectively for the solo string libraries. I actually find those observations more helpful in making a buying decision as well as to understanding the design and potential functionality of a library.



I don't think its a case of absolutes. I think there is a base level that a conventional brass library should be able to fulfil. John Williams is a very good test of this criteria in my opinion. If you don't want to write those kinds of lines its fine, but I don't think its fair to say the test is invalid because they are not what you are looking for.


----------



## ism (Dec 27, 2018)

jbuhler said:


> I would be happy if we could turn the conversation from the absolutes of better and worse ("if the library can't do X it sucks") and toward considerations of tradeoffs in the libraries, as you've done so effectively for the solo string libraries. I actually find those observations more helpful in making a buying decision as well as to understanding the design and potential functionality of a library.



What I’d like to get a sense of is what is the brass equivalent of this diagram... I have the sense that brass sampling is ahead of solo strings in the space it covers, if only because even that absolute best solo string libraries are still going to make you want to slam your head in a door at least some of the time. But this could of course be that I just know know enough about how really good brass is supposed to sound to know when a library should make me want to slam by head in a door.

In any event, I do have a sense that the space covered at least passably by sample libraries in the aesthetic universe of all possible brass lines is going to be at least a bit larger than for solo strings, and also that there should be a lot more overlap between competing libraries.

But could be totally wrong.


----------



## Soprano_Sundays (Dec 27, 2018)

ism said:


> What I’d like to get a sense of is what is the brass equivalent of this diagram... I have the sense that brass sampling is ahead of solo strings in the space it covers, if only because even that absolute best solo string libraries are still going to make you want to slam your head in a door at least some of the time. But this could of course be that I just know know enough about how really good brass is supposed to sound to know when a library should make me want to slam by head in a door.



Yeah I know what you mean! I feel a little bit the same about brass. I'm not sure my ear has enough experience with strings so the Solo strings libraries sound pretty great to me, but with brass I think I'm more used to hearing them live so I'm more critical.


----------



## sostenuto (Dec 27, 2018)

For 'early days' ( orch /cine/epic /hybrid ) users, with decent music training, it seems a background theme here is:
_In today's VI world, there is minimal incremental gain, in top-tier Strings and Brass libraries, versus some mid-tier options such as: NI_ Symphony Essentials /Series /Kontakt Fact Lib _VSL, or Kirk Hunter Diamond Symphony Orch /Spotlight Solo Strings, Virtuosos Ensembles,
or a range of other Libs such as The Orchestra, VSL _Smart Orchestra, BO_Inspire(s). etc._

This is of imminent importance with decisions like SF _ Studio Brass Pro, with $100. price swing tonight.
Asking in context of this excellent Thread _ that each Lib brings strengths for some scenarios, and weaknesses for others.

(_$299. is not 'chump change' for some, if Studio Brass does not bring notable enhancement _ in general _ versus these others alternatives _).


----------



## jbuhler (Dec 27, 2018)

Soprano_Sundays said:


> I think there is a base level that a conventional brass library should be able to fulfil. John Williams is a very good test of this criteria in my opinion.


I question its utility as a universal. Sure, I think it's fine to use it as a test and say this library has difficulty executing Williams brass well, and that can be a decisive data point for some people. But if it can't do it or doesn't render it quite as effectively as another that doesn't mean it's a bad library for what it's designed to do or that the library that can do it is objectively better at anything other than executing those figures. It doesn't even mean that a library that can't render the Williams figures as effectively is not a very effective base-level library if it's designed to be a section library, say, or how it sounds in context, where a lot of the differences become attenuated. I mean, I like to use the opening horn call from Mahler's Third as a way of testing the large ensemble patches of horns in order to get a sense of the tone of the patch, but it's only one data point, and not really the most important one even if it tells me quite a lot about the library's approach to sound. If people were using Williams that way I'd hardly object. But the debate has become not just whether CSB or SStB can handle Williams (and which does it better) or the tone of the library's sound in playing Williams—for my money they both handle it fine, with certain nuances here and others there, but overall with CSB coming out a bit on top—but that then passes over into the determination that the one that can handle it better is objectively the better library. Better at handling Williams, yes (but even there, not entirely), and if your goal is Williams brass then that might be decisive, but the library that is better at handling Williams is not objectively better at handling everything. And I just prefer the tone of the SStB to CSB, and I have a hard time getting past that for me.


----------



## jbuhler (Dec 27, 2018)

sostenuto said:


> _So_, for 'early days' ( orch /cine/epic /hybrid ) users, with decent music training, it seems a background theme here is:
> In today's VI world, there is minimal _incremental_ gain, in top-tier Strings and Brass libraries, versus some mid-tier options such as: NI_ Symphony Essentials /Series /Kontakt Fact Lib _VSL, or Kirk Hunter Diamond Symphony Orch /Spotlight Solo Strings, Virtuosos Ensembles,
> or a range of other Libs such as The Orchestra, VSL _Smart Orchestra, BO_Inspire(s). etc.
> 
> ...


SF Studio Brass Pro will get you a bunch of additional instruments, and it is very comprehensive for that price. The more expensive libraries generally give you more articulations and more control but with that comes more complexity and sometimes a paralyzing level of choice. Then, too, you need to think about what you want to optimize in your brass—solo work (soft lyrical, louder more incisive), soft swells and pads, flurries of short articulations that cut across the orchestra, punchy stabs, nasty longs, basic oompahs, etc., etc.—then you listen to the libraries for these capabilities. 

That said, SStB will almost certainly go on sale again, and next wishlist you'll probably be able to get it for even a better price than it is now. So if you don't feel an immediate need for a brass library—and I think you have a lot already (didn't you get the Arks as well?)—or you aren't thinking of acquiring the Studio series as a whole, there's little reason to get it now. You might be better off using what you have and figuring out what you feel like you are missing.


----------



## sostenuto (Dec 27, 2018)

jbuhler said:


> SF Studio Brass Pro will get you a bunch of additional instruments, and it is very comprehensive for that price. The more expensive libraries generally give you more articulations and more control but with that comes more complexity and sometimes a paralyzing level of choice. *******
> That said, SStB will almost certainly go on sale again, and next wishlist you'll probably be able to get it for even a better price than it is now. ******** You might be better off using what you have and figuring out what you feel like you are missing.



Yeh …. apologies for fuzzy inquiries … but sometimes tough …….
In this last Post, I was homing in specifically on *@ ism* _ "_..... want to slam your head in a door at least some of the time …_ " comment.
It causes me to wonder, seriously, if I'm capable of discerning useful differences among the Brass and String libs I _use now_, compared with what I would have after purchase of any, current top-tier offerings.

(edit) you make clear points (not unexpected) about no 'one lib for all', yet I would be persuaded to add pricey /quality Brass or Strings IF they covered a broader range of needs than any one /two of what I now have. If not, then I agree that it makes good sense to avoid more additions.


----------



## jbuhler (Dec 27, 2018)

sostenuto said:


> Yeh …. apologies for fuzzy inquiries … but sometimes tough …….
> In this last Post, I was homing in specifically on *@ ism* _ "_..... want to slam your head in a door at least some of the time …_ " comment.
> It causes me to wonder, seriously, if I'm capable of discerning useful differences among the Brass and String libs I _use now_, compared with what I would have after purchase of any, current top-tier offerings.
> 
> _Hope this helps explain my serious, yet fuzzy concerns …._


You have a lot of really good libraries already and I think working with them and figuring out what they can't do that you'd like them to do is the fastest way to figuring out what libraries to be looking at in the future. I mean I can tell you for instance that for me legato on brass is seldom a concern, but clearly from the comments on this forum that is not generally the case. But only you are going to be able to decide if it is important to you, and you'll only be able to figure that out by working with libraries and figuring out what compromises you are willing to live with, or phrased the other way around what do you want your library to optimize. 

Then, too, you might decide that even though your libraries aren't quite perfect they are good enough. So, for instance, I passed on Forzo, despite really liking the tone, because I didn't see that they would really change what I could do enough (and I couldn't get my head around the hybrid side of that library to know if it would be a useful addition). Likewise, with Ark 4, I've been struggling with whether it adds enough to my palette to warrant the cost. In general, my rule on sample libraries is if you are unsure about a library, wait until you are sure. For me, it's been a good rule, and the few times I've violated it I've usually ended up with a library that sits around unused.


----------



## Soprano_Sundays (Dec 27, 2018)

jbuhler said:


> I question its utility as a universal. Sure, I think it's fine to use it as a test and say this library has difficulty executing Williams brass well, and that can be a decisive data point for some people. But if it can't do it or doesn't render it quite as effectively as another that doesn't mean it's a bad library for what it's designed to do or that the library that can do it is objectively better at anything other than executing those figures. It doesn't even mean that a library that can't render the Williams figures as effectively is not a very effective base-level library if it's designed to be a section library, say, or how it sounds in context, where a lot of the differences become attenuated. I mean, I like to use the opening horn call from Mahler's Third as a way of testing the large ensemble patches of horns in order to get a sense of the tone of the patch, but it's only one data point, and not really the most important one even if it tells me quite a lot about the library's approach to sound. If people were using Williams that way I'd hardly object. But the debate has become not just whether CSB or SStB can handle Williams (and which does it better) or the tone of the library's sound in playing Williams—for my money they both handle it fine, with certain nuances here and others there, but overall with CSB coming out a bit on top—but that then passes over into the determination that the one that can handle it better is objectively the better library. Better at handling Williams, yes (but even there, not entirely), and if your goal is Williams brass then that might be decisive, but the library that is better at handling Williams is not objectively better at handling everything. And I just prefer the tone of the SStB to CSB, and I have a hard time getting past that for me.



I agree that hearing John Williams lines from a library shouldn't be the ultimate test. As you say its just one point of reference.

But I think hearing well known brass melodies, that people's ear have experience of hearing are a good starting point to getting an insight into whether the library has a solid foundation of different articulations and how they function together. It is just one point of reference but I still think a useful one.

I don't think it should be which library is better at John Williams as you say.


----------



## sostenuto (Dec 27, 2018)

jbuhler said:


> You have a lot of really good libraries already and I think working with them and figuring out what they can't do that you'd like them to do is the fastest way to figuring out what libraries to be looking at in the future. I mean I can tell you for instance that for me legato on brass is seldom a concern, but clearly from the comments on this forum that is not generally the case. But only you are going to be able to decide if it is important to you, and you'll only be able to figure that out by working with libraries and figuring out what compromises you are willing to live with, or phrased the other way around what do you want your library to optimize. *******
> 
> In general, my rule on sample libraries is if you are unsure about a library, wait until you are sure. For me, it's been a good rule, and the few times I've violated it I've usually ended up with a library that sits around unused.



Many thanks for patience and staying with me on this. It has brought me to much more comfortable position re. Studio Brass Pro _ in particular _ and some other WL considerations. 
There is little doubt I will 'enjoy' choices like OACE, BHCT much more, day-to-day, than iffy, less-used alternatives which bring incremental gains in existing categories (Strings, Brass). 

All the best !


----------



## ism (Dec 27, 2018)

Soprano_Sundays said:


> I agree that hearing John Williams lines from a library shouldn't be the ultimate test. As you say its just one point of reference.
> 
> But I think hearing well known brass melodies, that people's ear have experience of hearing are a good starting point to getting an insight into whether the library has a solid foundation of different articulations and how they function together. It is just one point of reference but I still think a useful one.
> 
> I don't think it should be which library is better at John Williams as you say.




Quite right.

I think the slightly deeper issue is when the raiders march, or some such, implicitly or perhaps even unconsciously becomes the gold standard by which all brass is judged. 

A lot of confusion and conflict here in general comes from strongly expressed judgements being debated but for which the criteria and context of those judgements is never properly explained nor sometimes even acknowledged = fetishization. Which is the breeding ground of unhelpfulness at best, and toxic death spirals at worst. 

So raiders march ~ excellent data point. But a single data point. And not everyone’s data point. And it’s all good.


----------



## kevthurman (Dec 27, 2018)

ism said:


> Quite right.
> 
> I think the slightly deeper issue is when the raiders march, or some such, implicitly or perhaps even unconsciously becomes the gold standard by which all brass is judged.
> 
> ...


I think raiders march is great because it's more than one data point. I can determine a lot just from that one excerpt. For instance, It gives a good idea of what range of short trumpet articulations are available, how well those short articulations match with longer sustains and even the legato transitions, and how the tone of those sustains sounds. It also tells me a lot about the quality of the trombone's shorts, and then tells a lot about how smooth the dynamic shifts of the bones and trumpets are in the last couple bars of the phrase. Where most brass libraries fall short is in having the consistency to sound like one instrument playing one line rather than a collection of disjointed samples, and an excerpt with so many articulations and dynamics packed in so tightly demonstrates how consistent and realistic a given library is in this regard.


----------



## kevthurman (Dec 27, 2018)

kevthurman said:


> I think raiders march is great because it's more than one data point. I can determine a lot just from that one excerpt. For instance, It gives a good idea of what range of short trumpet articulations are available, how well those short articulations match with longer sustains and even the legato transitions, and how the tone of those sustains sounds. It also tells me a lot about the quality of the trombone's shorts, and then tells a lot about how smooth the dynamic shifts of the bones and trumpets are in the last couple bars of the phrase. Where most brass libraries fall short is in having the consistency to sound like one instrument playing one line rather than a collection of disjointed samples, and an excerpt with so many articulations and dynamics packed in so tightly demonstrates how consistent and realistic a given library is in this regard.


That being said, it is not necessarily enough to make the final decision on a library.


----------



## zvenx (Dec 27, 2018)

The short version....
Has anyone tried blending Cinematic Studio Series Strings with Spitfire Audio Studio Brass? In one cue/song/theme etc?
If so how did they blend/work together.


The much longer versions..
The first Orchestral library whose sound I fell in love with was East West Symphonic Orchestra.. Sadly I had the Gold which had just too much room sound in it, but beyond that and of course the state of technology at the time, I loved the sound.

Fast forward a few years.
Audio Bro came out and announced LASS and Lass Lite....To be honest, I didn't hear any demo that I liked the sound of, but here and a few other places it got rave reviews and although we aren't by any stretch of the imagination friends, Andrew and I were both Nuendo users who had similar fights and complaints with SB and for me we bonded, so I took the chance and bought Lass Lite.

I should have listened to me not liking the demos, any demos... The sound does not appeal to me.....

Since that time I have been exceedingly cautious on which libraries I buy without being able to try and take as a cue if I don't like the sound of the demos, there is a strong possibility I wouldn't like me using the product.

Then Cinematic Strings and Cinematic Strings 2 came out and I fell in love with the sound and the price was right so I bought in and was not disappointed.

I also love the sound of Spitfire Symphony Orchestra and Chamber Orchestra sounds from the demos I have heard. Plan to buy them all one day, but for now since I am not writing epic film scores, I can't quite justify the purchase.

Then Alex came out with the Cinematic Studio Series.

Tbh I didn't buy the Strings until the Solo strings came out with the sound I liked, and I ended up buying the Studio Strings as well. Have not been disappointed. Although I must admit I still prefer the sound of the room, and recordings of Cinematic Strings (1 and 2).

So I made the decision, I will invest in Alex's libraries to get my Strings, Brass, Woodwind sounds and also Spitfire Symphony one day, but based on cost and disk space I would concentrate on CSS for now.

Sadly with the exception of one Simon's demos I havent heard any CSB demo that I like the sound of.... so my spider senses are on full alert about buying it.

Meanwhile on the Spitfire Audio front, I didn't much like the demos I have heard of Studio strings, but (with one exception) I like the sound of their Studio Brass. The one exception is as expected it is a bit dry for my taste, but hopefully nothing that some of the IR that came with it and my several plugin Reverbs won't fix.

So I am thinking of buying SA SB for now instead of CSB and let that be my brass library.
So I am curious to know how well it will work with Alex's Cinematic Studio Series Strings.

Any input appreciated.

thanks
rsp
(why I don't like the sound of CSB so far? it seems to be missing the bite I love to have in brass if needed, and I don't like the sound of the room..sounds to wash, distanced and lacking focus to me)


----------



## Geoff Grace (Dec 27, 2018)

jbuhler said:


> That said, SStB will almost certainly go on sale again, and next wishlist you'll probably be able to get it for even a better price than it is now.


Judging from Spitfire's sales during the last year, I'm going to predict that SStB will next go on sale at 25% off in May, for those who have it on their wish lists. That will amount to just 25 cents more than it is now for the pro version. Presuming another "thermonuclear" Christmas sale, it should be available for 40% off a year from now ($239.40 for the pro version).

Best,

Geoff


----------



## jbuhler (Dec 27, 2018)

Geoff Grace said:


> Judging from Spitfire's sales during the last year, I'm going to predict that SStB will next go on sale at 25% off in May, for those who have it on their wish lists. That will amount to just 25 cents more than it is now for the pro version. Presuming another "thermonuclear" Christmas sale, it should be available for 40% off a year from now ($239.40 for the pro version).
> 
> Best,
> 
> Geoff


They may have a sale on the full bundle when woodwinds are released as well.


----------



## Zoot_Rollo (Dec 27, 2018)

Geoff Grace said:


> Judging from Spitfire's sales during the last year, I'm going to predict that SStB will next go on sale at 25% off in May, for those who have it on their wish lists. That will amount to just 25 cents more than it is now for the pro version. Presuming another "thermonuclear" Christmas sale, it should be available for 40% off a year from now ($239.40 for the pro version).
> 
> Best,
> 
> Geoff



but, but

it's not Star Warsie.

HAPPY NEW YEAR!


----------



## ism (Dec 27, 2018)

kevthurman said:


> I think raiders march is great because it's more than one data point. I can determine a lot just from that one excerpt. For instance, It gives a good idea of what range of short trumpet articulations are available, how well those short articulations match with longer sustains and even the legato transitions, and how the tone of those sustains sounds. It also tells me a lot about the quality of the trombone's shorts, and then tells a lot about how smooth the dynamic shifts of the bones and trumpets are in the last couple bars of the phrase. Where most brass libraries fall short is in having the consistency to sound like one instrument playing one line rather than a collection of disjointed samples, and an excerpt with so many articulations and dynamics packed in so tightly demonstrates how consistent and realistic a given library is in this regard.




This is very helpful. 




jbuhler said:


> I like to use the opening horn call from Mahler's Third as a way of testing the large ensemble patches of horns in order to get a sense of the tone of the patch, but it's only one data point, and not really the most important one even if it tells me quite a lot about the library's approach to sound.




@jbuhler - could you put what you're listening for in the Malher passage in this kind of detail?


Also interesting - what would the raider's theme need to sound like if you wanted to play in the style of Mahler's Third? 


And a thought experiment - could we gather a selection of passages across a certain spectrum , and what details to listen for not just across the different passages, but perhaps in different styles. 

I'm trying to think how this might work in the realm of solo strings. But I think there the usefulness of this sort of think would be quite limited, the challenge would be that there's so little overlap in where the different libraries work best ... hmmm. 


Still almost completely clueless on about the nuances of brass libraries, but this is helpful.


----------



## NoamL (Dec 27, 2018)

I don't understand what is meant by "Williams brass." It is standard brass writing straight out of the classical repertoire...


----------



## kevthurman (Dec 27, 2018)

NoamL said:


> I don't understand what is meant by "Williams brass." It is standard brass writing straight out of the classical repertoire...


But more people are familiar with the theme to indiana jones than excerpts from perhaps Strauss' _Tod und Verklärung_ for example, and thus it makes a better litmus test in a public forum discussion. Believe me, when I get a new library, I test out a ton of my favorite orchestral excerpts too, but they also are a little more freely interpereted whereas recordings of film music are mostly set in stone.


----------



## Consona (Dec 27, 2018)

Hanu_H said:


> I have heard some examples but maybe you can give me a link what you are meaning?
> 
> -Hannes






jbuhler said:


> Really, this is completely untrue. A library optimized for Williams—and we're not talking about all Williams but a very limited subset that routinely gets trotted out in these examples but even if you took the full Williams—would have severe limitations and be less effective at rendering a lot of current brass writing in film and games. Now you might not like that sound, and a Williams' optimized brass might be able to handle it ok, but that is an entirely different question. A library that sucked at rendering Williams might easily excel at rendering another sound.


By "current music" you mean Zimmerish braaaming and short loud brass stabs? We already have quite a lot of libraries that can do that.

Williams means playability. It means you can compose classical music-like passages without sounding fake.


----------



## kevthurman (Dec 27, 2018)

Consona said:


> By "current music" you mean Zimmerish braaaming and short loud brass stabs? We already have quite a lot of libraries that can do that.
> 
> Williams means playability. It means you can compose classical music-like passages without sounding fake.



Yes and it's not just about individual articulations as instruments but rather how well the library can handle articulations all over the place. CS handles this excellently with their interface and the overall consistency of the library.


----------



## Consona (Dec 27, 2018)

kevthurman said:


> Yes and it's not just about individual articulations as instruments but rather how well the library can handle articulations all over the place. CS handles this excellently with their interface and the overall consistency of the library.


Except the short trumpets notes as we discussed in the CSB thread. But otherwise CSB sound pretty natural playing things like that, yea.


----------



## jbuhler (Dec 27, 2018)

Consona said:


> By "current music" you mean Zimmerish braaaming and short loud brass stabs? We already have quite a lot of libraries that can do that.


Not primarily, but certainly a different, often heavier sound than Williams general calls for. 

To my ears, the new Spitfire library and CSB are optimizing different things, even though there is a decent amount of overlap, and both libraries render the Williams' excerpts credibly, as I imagine they'd do with most standard passages, with sufficient attention to programming, even though they'd sound somewhat, maybe even quite different (as you'd expect with different players and different orchestras). With respect to @ism's diagram above, I think brass libraries generally cover a larger amount of that circle and there is a significant degree of overlap, though that's true of symphonic strings as well. 

Then, too, I prefer the tone of the Spitfire library—i hear a bit more aggression in it at higher dynamics and a bit rougher quality all over (rough not in a bad way but in an individualizing way), where with CSB I hear more smoothness (though the trombones sound are rougher, again in a good way), and the individuation occurs through lyrical legato. In that sense it is a good match to CSS. (Besides being less than thrilled with the tone of the instruments, I also dislike the mixes of the CSB demos on the website, and that might be influencing me.) I've also liked what I've heard of the shorts in the Spitfire library, which seem both generally more useful than those in Spitfire's Symphonic Brass (I generally only like the staccato) but also very complementary to the latter, which because I have SSyB is a big drawing point. The CSB shorts also sound good, and I have nothing against someone who prefers CSB. It's an excellent sounding library and I'm certain lots of good music will be made with it! 

In any case, I think the focus on those Williams' excerpts has turned the thread into a contest of which library renders them better, and that's not at all what I think the Spitfire library is designed to do; from what I can tell it's also not really what CSB is designed to do, though it's closer to one of CSB's sweet spots, and in any case it's not what I'm primarily interested in having a brass library do.


----------



## Soprano_Sundays (Dec 28, 2018)

Just saw this on youtube,


----------



## Consona (Dec 28, 2018)

jbuhler said:


> In any case, I think the focus on those Williams' excerpts has turned the thread into a contest of which library renders them better, and that's not at all what I think the Spitfire library is designed to do; from what I can tell it's also not really what CSB is designed to do, though it's closer to one of CSB's sweet spots, and in any case it's not what I'm primarily interested in having a brass library do.


It's not just Williams, look at the Herrmann demo. By "Williams" I mean playability, as with any old-school hollywood composer. There are just some people, including me, who want to hear how those libraries handle that stuff. And if the library is not designed to do that, then fine, but that does not mean it cannot handle that and to find out if it can, we need Williams and Herrmann demos.


----------



## Geoff Grace (Dec 28, 2018)

This video is also worth a look. It primarily features Spitfire's Studio Series instruments, showcasing the Brass and previewing the Woodwinds. The track starts around 4:04. 



Best,

Geoff


----------



## bryanmckay (Dec 28, 2018)

I don't own it, but based on the demos I've heard, CSB seems to have a lot of lyricism and expression baked in, which means it would likely sound great for mocking up a "big adventure score" (like the video posted above), except I don't really have any interest in making that sort of music on my own and I doubt Steven Spielberg will be calling me to score his latest film anytime soon. There's a slightly more subdued, delicate quality to the Spitfire Studio series and Spitfire sounds in general (HZ aside) that I really enjoy (though they certainly can get loud and brash when they need to) and sounds closer to me the tone of the music that I listen to most regularly (mostly various strains of contemporary classical music and rarely anything that would ever be described as epic). CSB might be extraordinarily playable, but it also appears to come with its own tone and emotion that I'm not interested in, though perhaps that's just my own misconception based on the videos and demos I've seen and heard.


----------



## jbuhler (Dec 28, 2018)

Consona said:


> It's not just Williams, look at the Herrmann demo. By "Williams" I mean playability, as with any old-school hollywood composer. There are just some people, including me, who want to hear how those libraries handle that stuff. And if the library is not designed to do that, then fine, but that does not mean it cannot handle that and to find out if it can, we need Williams and Herrmann demos.


Which Herrmann demo? The North by Northwest one? Last I checked no one has yet posted the Spitfire Studio Brass version. The Spitfire version is from the Symphony Brass, and I don't think the programming even for the better TM variant gets the best performance that can be got out of that library.


----------



## jbuhler (Dec 28, 2018)

bryanmckay said:


> a slightly more subdued, delicate quality to the Spitfire Studio series and Spitfire sounds in general


This is interesting because like you I favor the Spitfire tone over the CSB, but I'm drawn to something else that I'm hearing in the sound that's almost the opposite, more on the side of roughness and aggression (within the parameters of an orchestral sound) than of being subdued and delicate. That in turn suggests a good range of expressive tone in the SF library. I agree with you about the SF library fitting better with the tone of contemporary classical music, which is perhaps one of its sweet spots, though I'll have to think about what the correlates of "brass in contemporary classical music" are. With respect to the delicateness, are you thinking of the striking opening to CH's demo with the euphonium or something else?


----------



## bryanmckay (Dec 28, 2018)

jbuhler said:


> With respect to the delicateness, are you thinking of the striking opening to CH's demo with the euphonium or something else?



"Delicate" might not be the quite the right word, because it certainly is capable of sounding rougher, but that euphonium example is a good reference for how it can excel at those softer passages. I'm struggling to find the right word to describe what I like about the tone. CSB seems to have a more heroic, triumphant sound (at least based on what I've heard) so I'm really just trying to describe what the _absence _of that is... it's not quite the opposite, but it's definitely something different to my ears. I've been away from my rig for a week, so I'm itching now to get back and try to actually play with SStB again and maybe put this into more concrete terms, but I'm thinking now of the nice soft mid brass chords sound in BHCT and I feel these instruments are capable of similar timbres and moods.


----------



## JPQ (Dec 28, 2018)

Is hard choice but i feel need soemthing else to add my vsl setup even orchestral side.(ethnic and band stuff isnot evencounted here,i mean sampled "real" instrument sounds). similiar string products form these companies i feel is easier compare.


----------



## Consona (Dec 28, 2018)

jbuhler said:


> Which Herrmann demo? The North by Northwest one? Last I checked no one has yet posted the Spitfire Studio Brass version. The Spitfire version is from the Symphony Brass, and I don't think the programming even for the better TM variant gets the best performance that can be got out of that library.


Yea, the Northwest demo, I'm still waiting for SStB, and CSB, versions too.


----------



## Soprano_Sundays (Dec 29, 2018)

Geoff Grace said:


> This video is also worth a look. It primarily features Spitfire's Studio Series instruments, showcasing the Brass and previewing the Woodwinds. The track starts around 4:04.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




One of the reasons I was interested in hearing something like the Raider's March are the trumpets in Paul's demo at 4:37, it looks like its a legato patch from the screen yet it sounds half like a harmon mute with stem. Also any other exposed lines as wasn't sure about the sound of the horns at the beginning of another demo.


----------



## Bluemount Score (May 7, 2019)

Waking this interesting thread up again, does somebody maybe have another comparison of the *trumpets* in both libraries, or know where I could find a decent audio example?

EDIT: Never mind, pretty much found what I was searching


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 9, 2019)

jbuhler said:


> If those are the holes in your brass They are not my holes.


That's what she said BWA!


----------



## jaketanner (Sep 25, 2019)

Soprano_Sundays said:


> I agree that hearing John Williams lines from a library shouldn't be the ultimate test. As you say its just one point of reference.


Sorry to rehash an old thread here...but as I am searching for my own answers to brass libraries (CSB, SStB), it is clear that listening to demos is solely based on the skill set of the person performing it. Someone who inputs a JW brass cue by hand will fall short compared to someone who is talented enough to perform it live, then tweak as needed...it gives the library a whole different dimension. So which one is better at JW? depends on WHO is doing the mock-up. Have you heard John Powells mock-ups? Sound pretty darn good...take a person with a lot less experience in mockups, and it might end up sousing horrible...thus blaming the library as the issue.

And for the record, I am STILL not sure which way to go..LOL But leaning toward SStB for the flexibility and additional solo instruments that I can use with Century brass solos to create different ensembles...at least that's my rationale. LOL


----------



## jaketanner (Sep 26, 2019)

Zoot_Rollo said:


> i think the demos are selling SStB short.
> 
> comparing with my other Brassies (HWBD, VSL, Arks),
> 
> ...


Hi..sorry to rehash this old post, but as I am also struggling between CSB and SStB, what are your thoughts today on SStB VS CSB? Not really looking so much for the playability, but the overall sound in the end. I have CSS, and I also have both other PRO versions of the studio series. I have thought about HWBD, but not 100% sure about how I feel in terms of the articulation switching and Play. Thanks.


----------



## jaketanner (Sep 26, 2019)

djrustycans said:


> I prefer the sound of the recordings with SStB, not the realism. I have and really love CSS but don’t particularly like the sound of the room. It’s the same situation with CSB but in terms of programming and realism, I’ve loved most of what I’ve heard. Regarding the SStB demos, there are things I don’t like in all of them regarding realism but it may just be down to the usage in those particular situations. I’ve just bought SStB Pro and SStS Pro - downloading now!


HI...how are you still liking the SStB pro? The demos are not great...and it's between CSB and Studio. I know it usually comes down to what I write, but as an overall flexible library? From what I've heard, the horns in SStB sound terrible...do they sound better than what's in those tutorials? Thanks!!


----------



## constaneum (Sep 26, 2019)

I'm liking CSB a lot. my one and only to go for brass library. It has definitely replaced my Cinebrass Core (thought i can't deny i love the low brass patch)


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (Sep 26, 2019)

jaketanner said:


> I have CSS, and I also have both other PRO versions of the studio series.


Since you have CSS and SStS Pro, which do you favor? The answer might give some indication of which corresponding studio brass library would best suit you.


----------



## pawelmorytko (Sep 26, 2019)

constaneum said:


> I'm liking CSB a lot. my one and only to go for brass library. It has definitely replaced my Cinebrass Core (thought i can't deny i love the low brass patch)


Loving CSB also... IF I was ever to get another brass library it would be Berlin Brass for more instruments and extensive articulations.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Sep 26, 2019)

jaketanner said:


> I have thought about HWBD, but not 100% sure about how I feel in terms of the articulation switching and Play.



If you've never owned Hollywood Brass, I highly recommend it! I have only ever used Gold, but it is an excellent, comprehensive library with nice legato and solo sections.


----------



## jaketanner (Sep 26, 2019)

Land of Missing Parts said:


> Since you have CSS and SStS Pro, which do you favor? The answer might give some indication of which corresponding studio brass library would best suit you.
> 
> Personally, I use CSS (in combination with Fluid Shorts) and CSB every day, and they satisfy 90% of my string and brass section needs.
> 
> The other 10% of the time they can usually handle the job as well, but there are specialized tools that will do better.


So far, I would tend to favor the SStS over CSS...simply because I can get it to sound pretty big with the different mics, yet have the flexibility to go smaller. I have yet to use CSS actually, but I will once I need that type of smooth string sound. Also, SStS layered with PS' Con Moto violin B is awesome. it sounds just as big, if not bigger than CSS, but has a bit more clarity and bite to it. That combination is my favorite so far...very very similar to CSS, but imagine CSS with a lot more bite and brighter. 

My reservation with SStB is in the overall sound. Judging from the demos and walkthroughs I've heard, the horns don't particularly sound great. I realize that this is partly due to the room they're in...not a true concert hall where it gives the horns a chance to really become full. And while Simon might be a terrific engineer, maybe that's slightly the problem too...not sure. But if you listen to HWBrass...as old as it is, Sean Murphy is a true legend in orchestral recordings and that sound still stacks up today. I just don't like the whole platform thing and articulation mess, but overall sound is there. but...it has to be the room I guess. LOL


----------



## jaketanner (Sep 26, 2019)

Wolfie2112 said:


> If you've never owned Hollywood Brass, I highly recommend it! I have only ever used Gold, but it is an excellent, comprehensive library with nice legato and solo sections.


I've been on the cloud...tried it a few times, but didn't quite understand the articulations and mapping...While playability is not super high on the list, I hate having to go through those patches to find what I need. Yes, I can spend time with it and learn it also...but still on the fence. I think because I have Century Brass, and it's fairly cinematic and lush, I might want to get a library that's on the opposite side of that. So leaning towards Studio brass now.


----------



## Sears Poncho (Sep 26, 2019)

Land of Missing Parts said:


> Since you have CSS and SStS Pro, which do you favor? The answer might give some indication of which corresponding studio brass library would best suit you.


This. Since I have SStSPro, I bought the Studio Woodwinds yesterday. By themselves I thought "OK, not bad". Mixed with the strings I thought "hey, pretty good!"



jaketanner said:


> the horns don't particularly sound great. I realize that this is partly due to the room they're in...not a true concert hall where it gives the horns a chance to really become full.



Yup. It's always a bit of a jolt when I play with symphonies to go from "rehearsal room" to "concert hall" and the opposite, especially with nice halls (and lousy rehearsal rooms). But I was impressed enough with how the Studio Strings and Winds meshed together that I'll probably go all the way and get the brass. I'm beginning to hear the "studio" sound, or lack thereof. It's really clean, I can hear all the instruments individually overall and it's never a blur. Most people might not care if Bassoon 2 comes through, I do. I'm weird.


----------



## jaketanner (Sep 26, 2019)

Sears Poncho said:


> It's really clean


I think this is what I hear also..especially with the strings...I used SStS with Con Moto Violins as sounds absolutely amazing! Sound wise it's just as good as CSS with that extra detail that you don't get with CSS alone out the box. Maybe you're right...getting the brass to complete this might all work out...even if it's in there for that clarity. I agree that the larger symphonic instruments can get a bit lost in the mix quite easily, especially when combining different rooms, then adding your own reverb.


----------



## jaketanner (Sep 26, 2019)

so I have SStB now..pro. Want to report back from a bit of playing around with the legatos. Definitely not a main library. With a bit of work, the mic mixes do add a bit more to it, and with a killer reverb, might be good...I just used it in stand alone, so no additional reverb yet. I did pair it with Caspian, and let me tell you...the 3 trumpet patches in SStB along with Caspian trumpets sounds huge and awesome. Nothing like 7 trumpets coming at you.. LOL But not a real life arrangement for sure, but they can certainly serve as a type of divisi for Caspian. Tonally, they blend well together.

No solo instrument aside from the Euphonium, I'd use as exposed really, but blended in, I can see they will cut through nicely.

So as a supplemental library...as many have mentioned...great! As a main, go with CSB. Since I already have Century Brass, this is purely a different tone. However, blending both solo instruments with Century brass is quite nice. 2 horns from SStB along with Century solo horns...really nice. Even better is to transpose one up 3, then minus 3 on the Kontakt tune, then down 4 and up 4 on the Kontakt tune...THICK sound with all three horns. I like it. Nothing great on it's own, but blended in, there is no phasing at all, and I think this is where the magic lies with this library. Gives that extra bit of clarity and bite.


----------



## Sears Poncho (Sep 26, 2019)

jaketanner said:


> so I have SStB now..pro.


Funny. I ordered it too, core only. Still downloading. What are you planning/using for percussion?

Hopefully it will work well for me. My needs are probably different than most. I don't do film/epic, I don't want that sound. We'll find out soon...


----------



## jaketanner (Sep 26, 2019)

Sears Poncho said:


> Funny. I ordered it too, core only. Still downloading. What are you planning/using for percussion?
> 
> Hopefully it will work well for me. My needs are probably different than most. I don't do film/epic, I don't want that sound. We'll find out soon...


Is this your main library? If so I strongly recommend the pro version.

As for percussion, I currently have a few things to choose from. Albion One has great percussion for heavy stuff and cymbals, and I have Rhapsody Orchestral Perc for most everything else. I wanted to also get SD percussion, but I think between those two and even Damage plus Splash sound epic and the 8dio epic percussions I am covered for 99%. 

For the Studio series in general, I think that paired with a great reverb, you can shape the sound into many things. out of the box, it's not the greatest...blends well with others, and doesn't phase at all. I am looking forward to trying it with my Spaces II reverb as well.


----------



## Sears Poncho (Sep 26, 2019)

jaketanner said:


> Is this your main library? If so I strongly recommend the pro version.


So far, it's the only winds/brass I have outside of the stock Kontakt Library. I have SStS pro, so I might upgrade the other 2. I have lots of strings.

I typically just use Sibelius and Noteperformer. I figure I will try and up my game.


----------



## Sears Poncho (Sep 26, 2019)

It's gonna work fine. It has some quirks for sure, but sounds pretty good overall. Quick clip:


----------



## BlackDorito (Sep 26, 2019)

Sears Poncho said:


> I typically just use Sibelius and Noteperformer. I figure I will try and up my game.


Sibelius driving CSB will definitely up your brass game. Just remember to put '-25' in the note offset for all CSB/CSS/CSSS notes in your score to handle latency compensation relative to other instruments.


----------



## jaketanner (Sep 27, 2019)

Sears Poncho said:


> It's gonna work fine. It has some quirks for sure, but sounds pretty good overall. Quick clip:


Nice !


----------



## jaketanner (Sep 27, 2019)

Sears Poncho said:


> It's gonna work fine. It has some quirks for sure, but sounds pretty good overall. Quick clip:


Listening again with headphones, the brass sounds very harsh...not that it's necessarily bad, but the horns are usually much softer. Was this intentional, or did you find that you couldn't get a soft tone from the horns? I think the horns in general are not sweet or pleasing in any way...not compared to Century Brass horns that are smooth and have a beautiful tone. But as mentioned, combine the two libraries, and the tone gets even netter...so for me, I think the Studio brass in particular, is one that needs support from other libraries, rather than stand on its own...but of course it depends on the use too.


----------



## Sears Poncho (Sep 27, 2019)

I didn't put any thought in it, just did it quickly. The piece would have 4 trumpets which is rare, so it's gonna be loud. 4 horns at least in unison. It's loud. One can make it less harsh with riding the mod wheel etc. I tried it, works. Putting the mod wheel down a 1/4th brings the "rounder" tone, all the way up is the blaring metallic sound. 

I hate the solo horn. Has weird vibrato, sounds better when I turn it completely off. Listen to this. What the.... sounds like a Lawrence Welk clarinet-y vibrato....


----------



## jaketanner (Sep 27, 2019)

Sears Poncho said:


> I didn't put any thought in it, just did it quickly. The piece would have 4 trumpets which is rare, so it's gonna be loud. 4 horns at least in unison. It's loud. One can make it less harsh with riding the mod wheel etc. I tried it, works. Putting the mod wheel down a 1/4th brings the "rounder" tone, all the way up is the blaring metallic sound.
> 
> I hate the solo horn. Has weird vibrato, sounds better when I turn it completely off. Listen to this. What the.... sounds like a Lawrence Welk clarinet-y vibrato....


oh I know...the vibrato sucks.. LOL Hate it myself, however paired with the other solo horn and a2 patch, it works. But as Christian said, sounds like a drunken sailor or something like that.. LOL. Not sure the French horn SHOULD sound like that...

The 4 trumpets seem to be standard no? With Caspian its only 3...but Century gives me an a4 patch, and with all 3 patches in Studio brass, you can get a nice 4 trumpet sound...although VERY bright and brash...So this is why I think Studio Brass was a better buy than CSB...because it's a color that I didn't have already.

When I tried with the CB a4 trumpet patch to match what I heard on a BBC YT video, the trumpets more closely resembles that of the original sound...So SStB is definitely not an all around library...but I think we knew this.. LOL

Didn't think I would ever layer brass, but SStB does it so well that I'm inclined to do it more.

I would like to do as you may have mentioned in the past, a composition purely with the Studio series to see how they all gel together...now that it's complete. Maybe this week coming I'll make a little project out of it and see what happens..


----------



## jaketanner (Sep 27, 2019)

Sears Poncho said:


> I didn't put any thought in it, just did it quickly. The piece would have 4 trumpets which is rare, so it's gonna be loud. 4 horns at least in unison. It's loud. One can make it less harsh with riding the mod wheel etc. I tried it, works. Putting the mod wheel down a 1/4th brings the "rounder" tone, all the way up is the blaring metallic sound.
> 
> I hate the solo horn. Has weird vibrato, sounds better when I turn it completely off. Listen to this. What the.... sounds like a Lawrence Welk clarinet-y vibrato....


Question for you...does your horn 2 patch (regular default), have the longs? Mine doesn't playa all...but in the individual articulations patches it does.


----------



## Sears Poncho (Sep 27, 2019)

jaketanner said:


> The 4 trumpets seem to be standard no?


In libraries, I don't know. In the real world, no. 2-3. The Mahlers and R. Strausses aside, symphonies have 3 on the payroll, and the 3rd might be part-time. The movie world of course may have 18 zillion brass players. I'm kinda looking for the opposite which is why I like the Studio series/sound.

The core doesn't have Horn 2, it only has solo and a4. They both have legato and longs which work. Interesting- the legato and longs in a4 have different tones. Good to know.


----------



## jaketanner (Sep 27, 2019)

Sears Poncho said:


> In libraries, I don't know. In the real world, no. 2-3. The Mahlers and R. Strausses aside, symphonies have 3 on the payroll, and the 3rd might be part-time. The movie world of course may have 18 zillion brass players. I'm kinda looking for the opposite which is why I like the Studio series/sound.
> 
> The core doesn't have Horn 2, it only has solo and a4. They both have legato and longs which work. Interesting- the legato and longs in a4 have different tones. Good to know.


Ah right the core doesn’t have the 2nd horn. Btw, it does NOT have that crazy vibrato in horn 2. Otherwise I’d be pisses. Lol. Totally unusable as a solo but I don’t think they’re meant to be. I think the solo instruments are meant as harmonies for the a2 patches. Seems that way anyway.


----------



## NoamL (Sep 27, 2019)

I wish I had been around yesterday to tell you guys to purchase CSB!

It's simply the best brass library. I've been using it "under fire" on a TV show ever since it came out. It's amazing. Good musicianship in every sample, consistent programming and timing, very wide dynamic range, good crossfades, fast and slow articulations are easily mixable, good selection of instruments, it simply hits a home run on every level.

I will admit you have to fiddle with the sound. I don't very much like the mix-mic, so lately I started building a template loaded up that has all three mics loaded, with a bit of fiddling, mostly the wide mics are turned up IIRC.

Other libraries like SSTB, Century Brass, SSB, might sound better out of the box playing a single sustained note. Maybe they have the benefit of even greater recording spaces & recording engineers than CSB did... but ask yourself, if you have to mockup up traditional brass passages (not Batman/Inception style writing) what do you really need in a library? Great musicianship, articulation versatility, and the ease of use to program it in quickly. Get CSB. 

The only other brass libraries I have loaded in my template are:

Caspian - for an alternate fanfare-style sound

Albion 1 - the "Brass Mid" patch is a hidden gem for quiet, low brass chorales and it has a blended sound that is sometimes harder to get out of combining CSB's solo trombone, bass trombone and tuba.

Albion 3 Iceni - the "Nasty Brass" patch is fun for action/atonal cues.

Berlin Brass - some solo instruments loaded out of desperation that I'll one day justify using the damn thing, but I never do

Hollywood Brass - ditto but I actually use it rarely, if I want a fortissimo trumpet sound with no progressive vibrato, and some other rare use cases.

I've bought *way* too much brass over the years unfortunately, if I could go back and do it again I'd only get CSB, Caspian, and maybe Hollywood Brass Gold on sale or the Albions on sale.


----------



## jaketanner (Sep 27, 2019)

NoamL said:


> I wish I had been around yesterday to tell you guys to purchase CSB!
> 
> It's simply the best brass library. I've been using it "under fire" on a TV show ever since it came out. It's amazing. Good musicianship in every sample, consistent programming and timing, very wide dynamic range, good crossfades, fast and slow articulations are easily mixable, good selection of instruments, it simply hits a home run on every level.
> 
> ...


I wanted SStB simply to have a different flavor. Regret it slightly, but I didn’t want another lush sounding brass library. Century is quite nice, just needs that V2 update to be fully great. But SStB blends well with it. I still have the coupon for CSB and might get it as well, but yeah, maybe had you posted this before I’d considered it first. Lol.


----------



## NoamL (Sep 27, 2019)

Maybe it'll be on sale even more for Black Friday  you never know... 

I have Spitfire Studio Woodwinds (not the Pro) and have been satisfied enough with them. They don't hold a candle to real players but they're good enough to get mockups approved. Very nice value for 150.


----------



## jaketanner (Sep 27, 2019)

NoamL said:


> Maybe it'll be on sale even more for Black Friday  you never know...
> 
> I have Spitfire Studio Woodwinds (not the Pro) and have been satisfied enough with them. They don't hold a candle to real players but they're good enough to get mockups approved. Very nice value for 150.


I’m complete with the whole studio pro line. I have other libraries but I find the strings gs extremely good value and very nice sound. Their best studio library hands down. Brass. The worst. I mean they had to have known the sound isn’t great and they put it out anyway.


----------



## pawelmorytko (Sep 27, 2019)

NoamL said:


> I wish I had been around yesterday to tell you guys to purchase CSB!
> 
> It's simply the best brass library. I've been using it "under fire" on a TV show ever since it came out. It's amazing. Good musicianship in every sample, consistent programming and timing, very wide dynamic range, good crossfades, fast and slow articulations are easily mixable, good selection of instruments, it simply hits a home run on every level.
> 
> ...



What's wrong with Berlin Brass? I have CSB and love it but thought if I ever get another brass library it would be Berlin Brass since I love OT's products, and the demos for it sound amazing, and so do the walkthroughs


----------



## Sears Poncho (Sep 27, 2019)

NoamL said:


> I wish I had been around yesterday to tell you guys to purchase CSB!


I don't like the strings. They certainly aren't "bad", just not what I need. Too dark, not flexible enough and the legato lag would drive me bonkers. I do have CSSS so I have a point of reference. SSt Strings Pro is the most flexible, diverse library I've ever owned. I wanted to go "all the way" and I couldn't be happier. It all gels together, it all makes sense....except for them not having Studio Percussion. ;( 



jaketanner said:


> Regret it slightly,


I don't. As I said before, I'm not doing epic/movie style, I'm doing Symphony Pops. I've learned a bunch about them today, I can use these quite well. I'm sure I'll be updating the whole shebang to "pro" soon. I may sell a kidney if anyone is interested.


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (Sep 29, 2019)

Sears Poncho said:


> I don't like the strings. They certainly aren't "bad", just not what I need. Too dark, not flexible enough and the legato lag would drive me bonkers. I do have CSSS so I have a point of reference. SSt Strings Pro is the most flexible, diverse library I've ever owned. I wanted to go "all the way" and I couldn't be happier. It all gels together, it all makes sense....except for them not having Studio Percussion. ;(
> 
> 
> I don't. As I said before, I'm not doing epic/movie style, I'm doing Symphony Pops. I've learned a bunch about them today, I can use these quite well. I'm sure I'll be updating the whole shebang to "pro" soon. I may sell a kidney if anyone is interested.


How are those SStS trills? I'm asking because it's one of the few string options currently out there with trills beyond the standard ht/wt. There's Afflatus, of course, and there's Orchestral Tools Symphonic Sphere. But this is actually the most affordable option.


----------



## Sears Poncho (Sep 29, 2019)

Land of Missing Parts said:


> How are those SStS trills?


Clip attached.


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (Sep 29, 2019)

Sears Poncho said:


> Clip attached.


Thank you, kind poncho.


----------



## constaneum (Sep 29, 2019)

After getting CSB, I'm settled with brass. Looking forward to CSW!!! Woo hoo. I trust Alex's works.


----------

