# Symphonic Choirs Group Buy?



## José Herring (Sep 4, 2006)

I ran across this today. Group buy of EWSC for $400.

http://www.soundsonline.com/EastWest-Qu ... -165G.html


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Sep 4, 2006)

Ahhhh, finally I can have a large choir on my voice box saying, "Ned's not here, please leave a message!"

I t hink I'll pick this baby up - the price is way too right! Thanks for the headz-up, Jose!


----------



## Ed (Sep 4, 2006)

aww man that sucks. This means I probably have to buy it.


----------



## choc0thrax (Sep 4, 2006)

Yeah I might have to buy it also...we'll see. What's up witht he "thank topic" option I see ?


----------



## José Herring (Sep 4, 2006)

There's no doubt that I'm picking this thing up. It goes into my no brainer catagory of purchases.


----------



## sbkp (Sep 4, 2006)

choc0thrax @ Mon Sep 04 said:


> Yeah I might have to buy it also...we'll see. What's up witht he "thank topic" option I see ?



Just clicked it to find out. Now I show up as being "thankful to josejherring for this topic". Which I am, you know... cuz I contract for EW...


----------



## pdzl (Sep 4, 2006)

I may wait to consider this until the target price has been reached. 

There are no incentives to buy this early nor is there a guarantee that it's $400.


----------



## choc0thrax (Sep 4, 2006)

sbkp @ Mon Sep 04 said:


> choc0thrax @ Mon Sep 04 said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah I might have to buy it also...we'll see. What's up witht he "thank topic" option I see ?
> ...



That's what I was afraid of.  I made sure not to click it just in case. pdzl it is not guaranteed but these group buys like this always reach the lowest price easily. At first when I saw it could be $400 I was sorta excited but now I dunno, I think it's the official demo's that turn me off.


----------



## Niah (Sep 4, 2006)

choc0thrax @ Mon Sep 04 said:


> sbkp @ Mon Sep 04 said:
> 
> 
> > choc0thrax @ Mon Sep 04 said:
> ...



Exactly, I have yet to hear a demo that can fully convince me.


----------



## StanK (Sep 4, 2006)

I must agree with your criticisms. The sounds sound fake especially the consonants.

Like others mentioned I will wait until the reduced price goals are even reached before thinking about this.

Maybe many people already bought this with the 40% coupons from the RA and Colossus GB so I dunno if it will even hit the goals.

Patience pays off when it comes to buying from East West. The later you buy the better your savings.


----------



## Craig Sharmat (Sep 4, 2006)

while QLSC may not be perfect for everything, it is extremely useful and pretty versatile. It is a big part of my arsenal, and i find I go to it more than VOTA these days.


----------



## Sean Beeson (Sep 4, 2006)

East West has never failed at reaching the goals. I wouldn't be afraid of this one getting there. It will.


----------



## Rob Elliott (Sep 5, 2006)

Craig Sharmat @ Mon Sep 04 said:


> while QLSC may not be perfect for everything, it is extremely useful and pretty versatile. It is a big part of my arsenal, and i find I go to it more than VOTA these days.



Hi Craig,

I have VOTA and haven't wanted to pick up QLSC as it hasn't just blown me over (at least at the $1000 price tag.) Didn't see that much improvement over VOTA. Can you give us specifics of 'why' you find yourself going to it more than your VOTA - what genre, scenarios, etc.

Of course the other reason for my holdout was hoping that VSL would come out with thier choir - not sure where they are (maybe Nick knows more about that than us mere mortals :wink: )

Thanks Craig.


Rob


----------



## Rodney Glenn (Sep 5, 2006)

Craig,

I'd also be very interested in some more detailed info on how you feel VOTA differs from QLSC. It would be much appreciated.

Thank's in advance

Cheers

R


----------



## pdzl (Sep 5, 2006)

Craig Sharmat @ Mon Sep 04 said:


> while QLSC may not be perfect for everything, it is extremely useful and pretty versatile. It is a big part of my arsenal, and i find I go to it more than VOTA these days.



Isn't this a given? I was under the impression that QLSC was supposed to be a lot better than VOTA. Is there something VOTA still can do that QLSC can't or what VOTA has and QLSC doesn't?

Thank you for any information.


----------



## Ed (Sep 5, 2006)

pdzl @ Tue Sep 05 said:


> Isn't this a given? I was under the impression that QLSC was supposed to be a lot better than VOTA. Is there something VOTA still can do that QLSC can't or what VOTA has and QLSC doesn't?
> 
> Thank you for any information.



Apparently VOTA does the screaming trailer choirs better than SC. More powerfull or something. Kinda sucks if you do trailer music!


----------



## pdzl (Sep 5, 2006)

I am familiar with that and it is a good point. 

I meant Craig implied using VOTA still even though he owns QLSC and that QLSC does not make having VOTA worthless, so I was mostly wondering why.


----------



## pdzl (Sep 5, 2006)

Ed @ Tue Sep 05 said:


> pdzl @ Tue Sep 05 said:
> 
> 
> > Isn't this a given? I was under the impression that QLSC was supposed to be a lot better than VOTA. Is there something VOTA still can do that QLSC can't or what VOTA has and QLSC doesn't?
> ...



I see. Thanks for the information Ed! I thought QLSC was made mostly for Trailers? I have not heard it used well at all for soft, intimate music or where the choir is exposed. :???:


----------



## Daryl (Sep 5, 2006)

Ed @ Tue Sep 05 said:


> pdzl @ Tue Sep 05 said:
> 
> 
> > Isn't this a given? I was under the impression that QLSC was supposed to be a lot better than VOTA. Is there something VOTA still can do that QLSC can't or what VOTA has and QLSC doesn't?
> ...


In the end that becomes irrelevant, because you can't use VOTA for trailers anyway.

D


----------



## choc0thrax (Sep 5, 2006)

Daryl @ Tue Sep 05 said:


> Ed @ Tue Sep 05 said:
> 
> 
> > pdzl @ Tue Sep 05 said:
> ...



I thought you could as long as you don't live in the U.S.


----------



## Daryl (Sep 5, 2006)

choc0thrax @ Tue Sep 05 said:


> Daryl @ Tue Sep 05 said:
> 
> 
> > Ed @ Tue Sep 05 said:
> ...


I don't know about that, but I didn't go into it in much detail as I knew that I couldn't guarantee that my music wouldn't end up on a trailer, US or otherwise.

D


----------



## Ed (Sep 5, 2006)

Daryl @ Tue Sep 05 said:


> In the end that becomes irrelevant, because you can't use VOTA for trailers anyway.



Its hardly irrelevant. What about game trailers? What about a score that still calls for that particular sound? The licence stops you from using it in the US motion picture advertising buisness such as Immediate Music or X-Ray Dog, and if thats what you do then you cant use VOTA. Point is, just because you arent scoring trailers doesnt mean you wouldnt want that sound. The question was what can VOTA do better than SC. :neutral: 

Ed


----------



## Ed (Sep 5, 2006)

choc0thrax @ Tue Sep 05 said:


> I thought you could as long as you don't live in the U.S.



No, as long as you arent advertising in the US. Otherwise it wouldnt work to Nicks advantage too much.


----------



## pdzl (Sep 5, 2006)

I agree with Ed about that. I too understood it the way he meant, in terms of the sound of it. Obviously the VOTA license restriction sucks. But as I don't do trailers it doesn't make a difference to me.

But like Ed just reiterated, due to what Craig said, the implication was he still used VOTA for some things, whereas I thought something like this might render VOTA obsolete, but clearly that is not the case. So I wanted to follow up with Craig more information based on his post.


----------



## Ed (Sep 5, 2006)

Daryl @ Tue Sep 05 said:


> I don't know about that, but I didn't go into it in much detail as I knew that I couldn't guarantee that my music wouldn't end up on a trailer, US or otherwise.



What music do you do? If you do library music specifically written for trailers that would go against the licence. But if you just write library music and someone decides to use it, I think that would be okay. You'd probably have to ask about that. You have to understand why Nick wanted the restriction in the first place. He didnt want to loose work becuase someone else had his choir library, so he simply said no one can use the library that is working in US motion picture advertising.


----------



## Daryl (Sep 5, 2006)

Ed @ Tue Sep 05 said:


> Daryl @ Tue Sep 05 said:
> 
> 
> > I don't know about that, but I didn't go into it in much detail as I knew that I couldn't guarantee that my music wouldn't end up on a trailer, US or otherwise.
> ...


I'm afraid that my tracks wouldn't be released using VOTA as I have to guarantee to the library company that there are no restrictions in use for any of my samples (and I have to list what samples I use).

D


----------



## midphase (Sep 5, 2006)

I'm curious....if East West is changing their sample engine to a proprietary one...is it such a good idea to purchase their current Kontakt based products knowing that:

A. They'll probably come out with some major upgrades soon and...

B. They probably won't bother to make their existing line compatible with Mactel computers and later on with Vista?


----------



## Michiel Post (Sep 6, 2006)

Hi Midphase,
The most obvious advantage of proprietry software made this year would be to take advantage of 64 bit architecture on both macTel dual cores as Vista 64 bit, which is what I expect to be happening here. 
Doug already announced that EW will support all previous kompakt-based VI's with a (free) upgrade path. So what is the fear?


----------



## kid-surf (Sep 6, 2006)

*"In the end that becomes irrelevant, because you can't use VOTA for trailers anyway."*

Wow, really? How'd I miss that?

I think that's pretty goofy... I mean, how 'bout Nick just write better music than the people he's up against. Can't he beat people even if they do use his Choir? Dude, have a little confidence in your abilities to write "music".... 

Maybe that will be my pitch for the next gig. They'll say "are you any good, Kid?" I'll say "what does it matter, I have VOTA... when do I start?"

Maybe I'm crazy for thinking it's weird.... 

BTW ----- I'm in the process of developing a killer _commercial_ string lib.... and the license will stipulate that you will be free to use it at your own discretion (trust basis for folks, cuz I roll like that)..... so long as that doesn't include, Film, TV, Trailers, Video Gams, Commercials, Logos, Bumpers, Media of any kind, or _songs_.

Otherwise, knock yourself out.... 

List price is $750,000... lib will have twelve dongles in my new proprietary, and easy to set up, "*Matrix*™©®" configuration (which I'll dump in about 6 months, _just because_). Set up time is just under 3 weeks (fine print: if you're a tech-nerd). And you'll need just 18 (fine print: loaded) computers to run this lib. All tech support is handled by way of my knowledgeable staff.... in India. 

***I'm taking pre-orders now. But If you're patient enough to wait a year after everyone has it, I'll then drop the price to $39.95., and throw in a stuffed animal (with a cute friendly face). 

Sorry to see the comedy here, but I do...........

(and yes, I know all my EW licenses have just been nullified and my IP blocked. But this world is funny to me, it just is.... so please allow me to make fun of it)


----------



## Ed (Sep 6, 2006)

kid-surf @ Wed Sep 06 said:


> I think that's pretty goofy... I mean, how 'bout Nick just write better music than the people he's up against. Can't he beat people even if they do use his Choir? Dude, have a little confidence in your abilities to write "music"....
> 
> Maybe that will be my pitch for the next gig. They'll say "are you any good, Kid?" I'll say "what does it matter, I have VOTA... when do I start?"
> 
> Maybe I'm crazy for thinking it's weird....



I dont agree with that reason for thinking its weird, but it is especially unfair as SC has come out now which has no restriction and yet Nick still wont let you use VOTA in trailers. Kind of a silent admission that VOTA is still better for that kind of thing, isnt?

Ed


----------



## Niah (Sep 6, 2006)

Ed @ Wed Sep 06 said:


> kid-surf @ Wed Sep 06 said:
> 
> 
> > I think that's pretty goofy... I mean, how 'bout Nick just write better music than the people he's up against. Can't he beat people even if they do use his Choir? Dude, have a little confidence in your abilities to write "music"....
> ...



It's pretty simple my friend, it's just to make VOTA users buy SC, that's all.


----------



## Peter Emanuel Roos (Sep 6, 2006)

Some support for VOTA: Zimmer used it in the soundtrack for King Arthur. I immediately heard and checked out the sour thumb note that has a lot of 14 Khz hiss. Really weird, because the CD booklet mentions the choir, the choir master, etc. Still I am 100% sure there is also VOTA in this score (maybe I can find the files that I once made to prove this).


----------



## Craig Sharmat (Sep 6, 2006)

first you can use Vota in trailers if you had something to do with scoring the movie. Maybe people see game trailers on TV as trailers, but they are ads. I cannot see a problem there.

VOTA's sopranos are more aggressive than QLSC. this is the biggest complaint people have when considering QLSC. While VOTA is more aggressive than QLSC on the highest register, QLSC has it all over VOTA in sonic clarity, word forming, and in general it just sounds a lot better. I still find I can use QLSC for most trailer work, except the extreme top of the lungs stuff. This is where VOTA is better but it also falls short of real choir. Since it all is a compromise, I'll take the better sounding, easier to use choir 9 times out of 10.


----------



## pdzl (Sep 6, 2006)

Thank you Craig for the very informative post.

I have decided to get in on this. What especially sold me was the articulation movie demo.


----------



## Rodney Glenn (Sep 6, 2006)

Craig Sharmat @ Wed Sep 06 said:


> first you can use Vota in trailers if you had something to do with scoring the movie. Maybe people see game trailers on TV as trailers, but they are ads. I cannot see a problem there.
> 
> VOTA's sopranos are more aggressive than QLSC. this is the biggest complaint people have when considering QLSC. While VOTA is more aggressive than QLSC on the highest register, QLSC has it all over VOTA in sonic clarity, word forming, and in general it just sounds a lot better. I still find I can use QLSC for most trailer work, except the extreme top of the lungs stuff. This is where VOTA is better but it also falls short of real choir. Since it all is a compromise, I'll take the better sounding, easier to use choir 9 times out of 10.



Thank's Craig.

I have neither one ATM, but especially with the QLSC groupbuy I guess there's not much point in getting VOTA over QLSC then. Good to know about the more aggressive VOTA sopranos though. Thank's for the info.

R


----------



## kid-surf (Sep 6, 2006)

Craig --- 

I see a problem when someone has a "commercial" lib they won't let you use for "commercial" purposes. (a bit of an oxymoron)

And considering that composers never score their own Trailers.... 

What if every developer/composer had these 'unique' restrictions when they thought you might use their lib to go after "their" work. If every developer/composer had these type of restrictions people would definitely complain.

Makes me wonder if I need to read the fine print on all my libs to see if there are any more 'unique' reasons I can't use one of them..... (and what a waste of my time to do so)

Life goes on, but this is plain goofy in my book...

no offense to anyone, that's just my view.


----------



## Craig Sharmat (Sep 6, 2006)

This discussion about VOTA's license thing has been going on for years. Having VOTA, I wish they would just lift the restrictions also. To make it more silly, i believe some of VOTA content is in Colossus, so why not unrestrict it...oh well. The bottom line is if you need it for something other than trailers you buy it, if not lay off.


----------



## kid-surf (Sep 6, 2006)

Craig -- I hear you... but I've never heard of this before. So for me it's like "huh?"...

I think they should lift the restriction too. It really is quite silly.... as you say, considering some of it is in Colossus.


----------



## Synesthesia (Sep 7, 2006)

Hi all,

I recall some time ago hearing that Doug worked hard to persuade Nick to release VOTA - it was Nick's private lib for his Trailer business, recorded privately by him to get an edge on the competition.

Eventually Nick agreed to open the lib to the public with the caveat that it couldn't be used in direct competition to his core business.

So the options back then were - either you dont get VOTA at all, it stays a private lib, or you can buy it with a restricted use. Many people, myself included! were delighted to buy it understanding the restricted use.

Of course now the reason is lost in the mists of time everyone just thinks its a normal EW lib that Nick kept the use restricted for selfish reasons, where in fact it was originally private!!

Cheers

Paul


----------



## kid-surf (Sep 7, 2006)

Paul --

I see. That makes a little more sense then. Puts a different spin on it. My apology for picking on Nick...

Thanks for the info.


----------



## Rodney Glenn (Sep 8, 2006)

Ok, so this might be a very silly question, but as there is a new European Soundsonline site up now I just wanted this cleared up:

Will the number of buyers (subscribers) be added to the same "pool" regardless of being ordered from the US or the EU and not be handled as two "separate" ones?

R


----------



## Michiel Post (Sep 8, 2006)

Rodney Glenn @ Thu Sep 07 said:


> Ok, so this might be a very silly question, but as there is a new European Soundsonline site up now I just wanted this cleared up:
> 
> Will the number of buyers (subscribers) be added to the same "pool" regardless of being ordered from the US or the EU and not be handled as two "separate" ones?
> 
> R


Hi,
Michiel Post here, I am running Soundsonlƒæ    	.   Dj-    
/   Djž    1   Dk    4   Dk€     7   Dkñ    9   Dlb    ;   DlÓ    <   DmD    =   Dmµ    ?   Dn&    @   Dn—    E   Do    H   DoÃ    J   Dp    N   Dp¥    P   Dq    Q   Dq‡    R   Dqø    R   Dri    U   DrÚ    W   DsK    Y   DsÝ    Z   Dt      ^   Dt¿    !_   Du0    "`   Du¡    #c   Dv    $d   Dv»    %d   Dw,    &g   Dwa    'g   DwÒ    (i   DxC    )i   Dx´    *l   Dy%    +n   Dy–    ,r   Dst    -s   DzW    .s   DzÈ    /u   D{G    0w   D{ª    1z   D|    2€   D|    3‚   D}    4…   D}r    5ˆ   D}ã    6ˆ   D~T    7‰   DoS    8‹   D~ò    9Œ   Dc    :   DÔ    ;   D€E    


----------



## Rodney Glenn (Sep 8, 2006)

Michiel,

Sounds great. Thank's for clearing this up.

Cheers

Rodney


----------



## Ed (Sep 8, 2006)

Synesthesia @ Thu Sep 07 said:


> Of course now the reason is lost in the mists of time everyone just thinks its a normal EW lib that Nick kept the use restricted for selfish reasons, where in fact it was originally private!!



I know but it just doesnt make sence anymore. SC can be used in trailers, and its hyped as much better than VOTA. Perhaps not in those words, but thats the unavoidable implication. So my point is, if VOTA is still better in some ways so that Nick wants to keep the restriction, then he cant come out and say that is the reason or he'll risk acknowledging a "flaw" in SC. 

Ed


----------



## Michiel Post (Sep 11, 2006)

The vowels, consonants and effects are all separate nki programs that you can use without key switching and Word Builder if you want. No extra steps needed.

Word Builder works with the provided multi's. Each multi loads all the necessary programs in memory at once so that WB can do it's thing (MAGIC!).


----------



## Peter Emanuel Roos (Sep 20, 2006)

Ed @ Wed Sep 20 said:


> Peter Roos @ Wed Sep 20 said:
> 
> 
> > Michiel, I guess I can order it ex BTW if I provide you with my BTW-number?
> ...



Start a company in The Netherlands! 

BTW is our Value Added Tax (19%), which has to be paid by "normal citizens" for nearly everything they buy. Companies work without it, only the schmucks in the street have to cough it up :???: 

Until now, I still don't understand what "Value added" means in this context.

Incredible source of income for the government, that's for sure.


----------

