# Hollywood Strings Vs LASS Part1 (General Comparison) -VIDEO



## chimuelo (May 13, 2011)

Very nice of you to do this.
I am a happy LASS owner but also love the sound of HS, especially using QL Spaces.
I look forward to seeing it but after 4 x tries on YouTube I moved on.
Just in case anyone else had troubles seeing this I snapshotted it.


----------



## Daniel James (May 13, 2011)

chimuelo @ Fri May 13 said:


> Very nice of you to do this.
> I am a happy LASS owner but also love the sound of HS, especially using QL Spaces.
> I look forward to seeing it but after 4 x tries on YouTube I moved on.
> Just in case anyone else had troubles seeing this I snapshotted it.



Yeah I checked twitter for 'youtube down' and it seems to be the case for everyone...just as the video finished uploading....Conspiracy anyone?

I can watch after a few tries :D

Dan


----------



## Chris Hein (May 13, 2011)

Fantastic video, thanks so much.

My favorite is: "One of the positives of Play is, it gives you time to write a poem while loading"
I never had the time to even think about writing a poem, now I know I have to get Hollywood strings.


Chris Hein


----------



## dogforester (May 13, 2011)

Cheers daniel, very helpful and you made me want symphobia aswell! >8o :D


----------



## Lloyd10 (May 13, 2011)

Excellent video (as always) Dan,

Look forward to the next parts of this shoot out.

Symphobia seems to come out of this really well in terms of the sonics.

You should dive in & do a video exploring Symphobia 2 as its a powerful add-on to have.

And it loads quick too...


----------



## rectifried (May 13, 2011)

great info
thx


----------



## TheUnfinished (May 13, 2011)

dogforester @ Fri May 13 said:


> Cheers daniel, very helpful and you made me want symphobia aswell! >8o :D


Same here!


----------



## Andrew Aversa (May 13, 2011)

Very very helpful. Thank you for this video!


----------



## robh (May 13, 2011)

Good job, Daniel.

I have LASS (full) myself, and I wouldn't mind seeing a future video on the divisi sections playing in unison - perhaps even using the same examples you did for this video. I find LASS used this way has much more life to it than using the full patches, so I don't even touch those anymore.

Rob


----------



## synergy543 (May 13, 2011)

Chris Hein @ Fri May 13 said:


> ...My favorite is: "One of the positives of Play is, it gives you time to write a poem while loading"


Great comment Daniel!

I had a mouth full of coffee and fortunately was able to hold it in without spraying it all over my keyboad and monitor.


----------



## germancomponist (May 13, 2011)

Interesting to watch and listen to the differents between libraries.

Very cool what you did and do, Daniel!


----------



## José Herring (May 13, 2011)

Daniel James @ Fri May 13 said:


> Hey Guys,
> 
> I received my copy of Hollywood Strings so I thought I would start a little video series comparing the two.
> 
> ...



Great Vid. In general I thought that HS sounded phenomenally good. Pitty about Play. But, it's almost like HS sounds too good. I went back and compared your video to a bunch of recent film scores and in all honesty I thought that LASS was closer in sound to at least the scores I referenced. Which is not what I was expecting. It's almost as if HS has that '80ies, 90ies ultra refined string production, and yet people these days seem to be going back to a more naked type string sound.

I dunno really. I don't really study film music any more. Does anybody else have the same impression?


----------



## germancomponist (May 13, 2011)

josejherring @ Fri May 13 said:


> I dunno really. I don't really study film music any more. Does anybody else have the same impression?


An interesting question. Maybe we have to wait some month and then do comparisons...? Or do you compare with real recorded scores?


----------



## José Herring (May 13, 2011)

I'm comparing them to scores done in the last year:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pedijxa0-7g

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFuxWoztMbA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjSctXi-0sg


----------



## germancomponist (May 13, 2011)

I think I have not the "right" answer.  

One thing for sure is that we all listen to the sound from each other and maybe it got to a trend in this sound/tone direction?


----------



## noiseboyuk (May 13, 2011)

Daniel - another great video. One observation - when it comes to string legato lines in particular, I really want to hear the controllers at work (cc1 in LASS) to get a feel for how expressive it can be. IMHO LASS only comes alive when you ride cc1 - then it's magic. Also the trem demo towards the end didn't seem like-for-like - I think with Symphobia and LASS cc1 was riding velocity (crossfading between genuine p and f), but HS was just riding the volume without changing the actual playing style (correct me if I'm wrong!) so accordingly sounded less expressive and dramatic.

On a general point, you did a great job at showing the real-world problems in HS, and the inevitable frustration cos the sound is lovely. Let's hope it quickly becomes an historical document, with loading times and RAM use changed significantly in Play 3!


----------



## Joe S (May 13, 2011)

Interesting to see the difference in P!AY versus KOntakt and also patch size etc..

But that's where my interest ended. 

Not using any controllers with HS is like an artist not using any shading or color. 

What are you trying to prove here?

And why are there string pads in the background all that reverb?


----------



## Daniel James (May 13, 2011)

Joe S @ Fri May 13 said:


> Interesting to see the difference in P!AY versus KOntakt and also patch size etc..
> 
> But that's where my interest ended.
> 
> ...



I think its a fair comparison as I am using the exact same MIDI files for each library. The purpose of this video was to show some raw direct comparisons between the libraries.

This part 1 video was more about load times and memory footprint aswell as an exact basic comparison to how each library reacts from the get go. 

I am not out to champion one library over another, I am simply giving an honest opinion on each with the confines of my own working environment.

Dan


----------



## Danny_Owen (May 13, 2011)

> I think its a fair comparison as I am using the exact same MIDI files for each library



Well.. yes and no surely. Part of what seperates Hollywood Strings (on its bigger patches) from LASS is the vibrato control, something that unless you were to make custom patches with LASS you couldn't do, and certainly not with Molto Vibrato at all.

Having said that I really enjoyed the video and thanks for taking the time to do it, it was really interesting to see side by side out the box demos.


----------



## David Story (May 13, 2011)

The long awaited, side-by-side demo. Thank you Daniel!

LASS has super programing
HS has super recording/mix
Symphobia has super programing and recording/mix.

Symphobia is the standard of excellence, in my view, though the others are useful.


----------



## Marius Masalar (May 13, 2011)

Daniel,

Great vid again, I was amused and informed 

With respect though, using the same MIDI file for each library is exactly what I consider the mark of making it an UNFAIR comparison. It would only be fair if all the libraries were programmed identically and the only difference was the audio samples themselves, but that is clearly not the case, so using the same MIDI file for all libraries only serves to highlight the quality of whichever library you first recorded that line with.

Just my two cents, of course, but for me to consider this a fair comparison I would have liked you to do your best to sequence the same line for each library, being conscious of each one's individual programming quirks.

Thank you for taking the time though; if nothing else its a terrific side-by-side comparison of the relative tone qualities and tuning.


----------



## Daniel James (May 13, 2011)

Just want to point out now, that at the start of the video I do say, and I quote "The way I am going to be showing these libraries is how I would use them" of course I am not going to work the same way as everyone else, so before I get alot of "you are doing it wrong" messages, keep in mind these videos are molded around the way I like to work...not around the way I 'should' be working.

Dan


----------



## midphase (May 13, 2011)

David Story @ Fri May 13 said:


> Symphobia has super programing and recording/mix.
> 
> Symphobia is the standard of excellence, in my view, though the others are useful.



Hmmm...as a Symphobia owner, I will say that it has many strengths, but the programming ain't one of them IMHO.

Maybe Sym 2 is better...but I wouldn't know since I don't have that one.


----------



## adg21 (May 13, 2011)

Nice video Daniel. I think that because the phrases and chord changes were reasonably slow and simple it didn't matter that you used the same midi file. In fact I'd say the method was pretty fair, you used Symphobia as the No.1 and this was essentially a Hollywood Strings Vs LASS test, it was a good straight out the box A-B test. You tried CC1 on all, fixed HS when it didn't work to make it fairer etc. Looking really deep into how each library is programmed, and what they offer that is unique to them, you can do by watching their product tech demos, listening to demos and even reading the manual. You call the video a "general comparison" and I think you did that really well. Look forward to watching more.

Only thing I'd say is perhaps to ease the reverb a tad, just for the comparisons, but all in all o-[][]-o


----------



## noiseboyuk (May 13, 2011)

adg21 @ Sat May 14 said:


> You tried CC1 on all, fixed HS when it didn't work to make it fairer etc.



That was my only real problem - I think (unless I've misunderstood) in that section after there was no controller data, HS was mapped to expression while LASS and Symphobia had velocity, so that wasn't really a like-for-like.

You asked for suggestions for a part 2 Daniel - comparing what you can do with the controllers would be top of my list. Perhaps follow Thomas' mic suggestion, and also tip about using 2 controllers for HS. See if it really can bring a line to life more than LASS (which does a great job anyway). Also keen to hear some of the HS runs... still not really getting on with Orchestral String Runs to be honest, too many artifacts, so this is of particular interest to me.

You do a brilliant job with these videos mate! Keep 'em coming!


----------



## Tino Danielzik (May 13, 2011)

Really great Video!! Thanks a lot! I use LASS Full and don't own HS yet. And the question is simple, what kind of sound do you prefer, a more expressive sound or a more softer, brighter and bigger one. I "personally" prefer the more expressive sound I get with LASS. But of course the huge amount of RAM HS patches need is a joke, and you didn't even load an additional mic position.


----------



## Treb (May 13, 2011)

noiseboyuk @ Fri May 13 said:


> adg21 @ Sat May 14 said:
> 
> 
> > You tried CC1 on all, fixed HS when it didn't work to make it fairer etc.
> ...



From what I remember when viewing the video this morning... when he copy/pasted the original MIDI from Symphobia/LASS to HS, it originally retained the CC1/velocity. But since HS maps velocity layers to CC11, that's why he pasted the CC1 data to CC11... so I think it's a fair comparison. In HS CC1 is an independent controller for vibrato layers.

And the "writing a poem" part made me laugh my butt off. Totally made my day. :]


----------



## Rob Elliott (May 13, 2011)

Thomas_J @ Fri May 13 said:


> And by the way, the "main" mic position used in Daniel's demonstration sounds best when combined with the close mics (this is how Shawn Murphy mixes almost all of John Williams' scores (30% close / 70 % main). He typically adds a tiny bit of high end and boosts the 70-110hz range a little bit. I prefer the divisi mics combined with the mids myself. It has a more detailed sound. Cheers!




Helpful Thomas. I have settled in on the mids and surrounds but will look at your suggestion as detail is sometimes lacking in my sequences.


Can you tell which patches your specifically use for the largest of the legato ones (I am running SSD's) - (both divisi and mids). Are you going about 30/70% mix (divisi to mids) I really haven't gotten into the divisi's but will open my mind to them. Thanks in advance.


----------



## marcotronic (May 13, 2011)

Thanks a lot both Daniel for another great video and Thomas for the tips on HS.

I also own both LASS Full and HS Diamond and actually only bought LASS after HS gave me too much headache. Really looking forward to Play 3!

Marco


----------



## tripit (May 13, 2011)

josejherring @ Fri May 13 said:


> I dunno really. I don't really study film music any more. Does anybody else have the same impression?



Funny you mention that...I was thinking along the same lines recently. Maybe it's because a lot of film scores seem to be leaning more towards a "less is more" using more intimate and edgy sounds. You don't hear a lot of JW type sound in new films.


----------



## noiseboyuk (May 13, 2011)

Treb @ Sat May 14 said:


> From what I remember when viewing the video this morning... when he copy/pasted the original MIDI from Symphobia/LASS to HS, it originally retained the CC1/velocity. But since HS maps velocity layers to CC11, that's why he pasted the CC1 data to CC11... so I think it's a fair comparison. In HS CC1 is an independent controller for vibrato layers.
> 
> And the "writing a poem" part made me laugh my butt off. Totally made my day. :]



Oh yeah, it's all switched around for some patches in HS isn't it?! Well add that to my wish list to video 2 - the differences in using CCs between the libraries! And the difference between using 1 and 2 controllers in HS.

The poem line was good, but the one that made me bark out loud was one of Daniel's other rueful suggestions of things to do whilst waiting: "..... contemplate your purchase...."

Anyway, the news there from Nick and Thomas is good. x10 improvement on SSD, x3 on regular drives. That's getting Play in the ballpark I'd say - at least on load times. Now just eagerly awaiting news on RAM use and streaming reliability. Then once all those are sorted, we can just swiftly deal with lossless compression, user controllability and more intelligent scrtipting, Play will be a winner!


----------



## adg21 (May 14, 2011)

tripit @ Sat May 14 said:


> josejherring @ Fri May 13 said:
> 
> 
> > I dunno really. I don't really study film music any more. Does anybody else have the same impression?
> ...


I think they are just smaller string sectilons no?


----------



## vlado hudec (May 14, 2011)

nice video Dan !

my only suggestion is, in part2, please low down the reverb on main bus, because it was tooo much wet 

and regarding to next video, I would be interested to hear some short notes phrases (staccato, spicato, marcato) with cellos, violas. violins and also divisi comparision.

Thanks

V


----------



## Daniel James (May 14, 2011)

noiseboyuk @ Fri May 13 said:


> Treb @ Sat May 14 said:
> 
> 
> > From what I remember when viewing the video this morning... when he copy/pasted the original MIDI from Symphobia/LASS to HS, it originally retained the CC1/velocity. But since HS maps velocity layers to CC11, that's why he pasted the CC1 data to CC11... so I think it's a fair comparison. In HS CC1 is an independent controller for vibrato layers.
> ...



Yeah Noiseboy, is some of the patches the dynamics are switched to a different CC and if you watch in the video I make note of this and copy the exact controller information onto the correct CC.

I totally agree, if they can get PLAY up to the standard of Kontakt it will be an absolute winner.

@vlado: I shall make a point of doing that for you mate. My reverbs are normally set at a level which makes them work in context of a full mix, If I do more naked comparisons I shall turn it down.

Cheers for the comments guys.

Dan


----------



## rayinstirling (May 14, 2011)

Daniel,

Thanks for posting another informative video.
What I love about this one and the others is your no nonsense attitude of "getting the job done". It seems to me that this is far and away the most important issue facing the majority of composers wishing to earn a living from producing saleable music.


----------



## Polarity (May 14, 2011)

> And the "writing a poem" part made me laugh my butt off. Totally made my day. :]



:LOL indeed!!
I did notice that slow loading speed just with Symphonic Choirs and some SO Gold patches... but HS is really terrible. 

Thanks again Dan, great and and interesting video!

HS has a beautiful sound but honestly when you compared the same exactly lines, I prefer the more edgy sound of LASS than the soft HS one.
Symphobia makes a fantastic background, but also using SO Gold strings (I'm talking about single sections patches, not the full ones) can layer quite good under LASS main lines, and without using all that RAM as HS does. 

In the last time I definitively prefer Kontakt4 against PLAY, for a lot of features. 
For example PLAY hasn't a confortable or efficient Purge mode like K4,
and doesn't even work fine (at least to me).
In general (all features) K4 vs PLAY it's like a leopard vs an elephant.

I'm very happy I didn't wait for HS last year and chosen the LASS side this time.
With latest release PLAY became a PITA also for me, giving issues that I didn't have in past: like whitenoise bursts... it almost killed my ear!! 
And curiously EW wrote that version fixed the issue... never had it before they "fixed" it.
I reverted to pre-integrated Wordbuilder versions, but still I almost use PLAY anymore and went to K4 or Trillian as regular substitutes.

Hollywood Strings: great sound, but bad software!


----------



## synthnut (May 14, 2011)

Daniel,
Thanks so much for this comparison .....It really was an eye openner ....I too was surprised how well Symphoba was represented .....What was pretty shocking was not only the load times involved , but having to RE load was just another added blunder not to mention the larger hunks of space needed for the larger patches .... I STILL say the same thing that I said in an earlier thread .... I really love the sound of HS, and also love the variety of the program , and I'm sure that a LOT more folks would buy it , IF if were ported for Kontakt !!.... Again , in all fairness to PLAY , its still in it's infancy compared to Kontakt, but I feel that folks are being forced to use a beta engine to get the libraries that they really enjoy .... I feel this is a diservice to both the consumer and the manufacturer.....Loose/Loose ....... Too bad really .....I would LOVE to own HS in Kontakt and it would be my first choice ....Your comparison just makes Symphobia and LASS shine that much more .....Jim


----------



## noiseboyuk (May 14, 2011)

synthnut @ Sat May 14 said:


> Daniel,
> Thanks so much for this comparison .....It really was an eye openner ....I too was surprised how well Symphoba was represented .....What was pretty shocking was not only the load times involved , but having to RE load was just another added blunder not to mention the larger hunks of space needed for the larger patches .... I STILL say the same thing that I said in an earlier thread .... I really love the sound of HS, and also love the variety of the program , and I'm sure that a LOT more folks would buy it , IF if were ported for Kontakt !!.... Again , in all fairness to PLAY , its still in it's infancy compared to Kontakt, but I feel that folks are being forced to use a beta engine to get the libraries that they really enjoy .... I feel this is a diservice to both the consumer and the manufacturer.....Loose/Loose ....... Too bad really .....I would LOVE to own HS in Kontakt and it would be my first choice ....Your comparison just makes Symphobia and LASS shine that much more .....Jim



I know I'm a stuck record on this particular subject at the moment, but things are just getting better and better with Kontakt if you move to SSDs. That beautiful 4 layer Symphobia strings sustain patch occupies 7mb on my new system. The basic Lass Lite violin legato - 6mb (this versus several hundred meg on Play). CineOrch Low Chords - 1mb. I'll type that again cos even I can't believe it... ONE MEGABYTE! Sadly none of it gives me time to write any poetry though...

This is what Play is up against. They're running to stand still. Those improved Play 3 load times are a lifesaver, but it's still only a part of the equation. Until they get lossless compression, some really efficient streaming etc, it's still very hard for them to compete.


----------



## chimuelo (May 14, 2011)

Nice video.
Really appreciate the time it took.
If anything this video shows the importance of having both IMO.


----------



## Craig Sharmat (May 14, 2011)

Thomas_J @ Fri May 13 said:


> Just a quick note - The new version of PLAY that we are currently testing has almost 10x faster loading times for people on SSDs and about 3x faster on regular 7200 drives. That will take care of the loading times issue. Streaming is _considerably_ better too. Other than that, HS is really about the powerful system patches, not the light patches shown in this demo, and I can't stress enough that in HS you want to be using the patches that offer vibrato and dynamic control independently.



are those SSD loading times for Mac as well as PC?


----------



## Ashermusic (May 14, 2011)

OK, I only have a couple of minutes to answer this as my daughter is getting married next week and I have a lot to do.

Daniel, I take you at your word that you mean to be fair but the end result is not.

1. My biggest problem is that you say a number of times that the two sound pretty similar. IMHO, they do not sound similar at all, whichever one prefers, and if you turned off the verb that would we even more obvious. Kirk Hunter's and Sonivox sound different from either of them as well. I know this because I had all 4.

2. Using the same MIDI file when the libraries react differently to the MIDI controllers is inherently unfair to all of them.

3. The fact that you write starting with an ensemble and are so pad oriented is not how an orchestrator thinks and HS is geared to guys who know what real strings do. There is no orchestral instrument called the "string ensemble", there are violins, viola, cellos, and basses and when played they each need to be played differently so you cannot do it all at once and expect it to be close to reality. Pads are relatively easy to make sound good with any combo of libraries. Hell, I used to do nice pads with a Korg M1 MIDIied to a Kurzweil 1000 PX.

4. The Symphobia stuff sounds quite good but actually not dissimilar to the Omnisphere patch Hollywood Studio String Section and if I were to do pads, I could use that and get that sound and effect it seems but I do not own Symphobia so perhaps I am wrong about that.

5. Yes, the Play loading times are slow but they are considerably faster in the betas I am testing and more optimization is promised. That said, most pros I know offload a lot of there stuff into either VE Pro and/or Plogue Bidule so the stuff is just sitting there waiting, kind of like a virtual 2080 for them.

Once again, not challenging your intentions, integrity or skills, just your methodology and conclusions.


----------



## nikolas (May 14, 2011)

Jay, you forgot to switch members when posting this! :D (LOL?)

1. I got a feeling that Daniel was refering to what was on offer, not *purely* on how it sounded (although they did sound somewhat close). And yes every library is different I agree!

2. True about that. And it's something I questioned EW a long time ago when they made midi tests for their pianos (ok... QL pianos). I'm just uncertain about which library Daniel used to make the lines.

3. Yes and no... It really comes down to how everyone works on what type of music. But ultimately I think that Daniel was mainly concerned with what was on offer and how much it costs (hard disk space, RAM usage, loading time, etc).

4. No idea about that one either! ^_^

5. After seeing the video, I surely hope that loading times will go faster. And 10x is really really fast I think!  Good job there!

Oh and...












MAY YOUR DAUGHTER LIVE HAPPILY EVER AFTER and you gain a few grand children pretty soon!


----------



## zvenx (May 14, 2011)

First of all, Daniel really really thank you for doing this... it is really obvious to me as you have said, this is a comparison based on how *you* work and it doesn't take time to bring out the nuances of each library to the fullest.. that for me is no problem I fully understand that..

You work similar to how I work (at least in my mind ), so for me this was very very useful.....
Like many others Symphobia really suprised me and tbh is probably the one I should get before any of the other two.....

I really wanted to like the sound of LASS over Hollywood Sounds for personal reasons, but in all honesty although the sounds were similar to a degree, there was an emotional attachment/reaction I had with the sound of Hollywood Strings that I didn't get with LASS...kind of like if I played a part on a guitar vs. Eric Clapton playing the 'same' part  ......
But Play as is, is a problem I so wish EW had continued with Kontakt rather than developing their own engine. Thomas J says the new version alleviates some of the problems you noted. we shall see. but to me they wouldn't have to be playing catch up in software had they stuck with the NI Kontakt. They had their reasons, and I assume they know best......

thanks again.

rsp


----------



## noiseboyuk (May 14, 2011)

Hi Richard - a few people have gone on about the dynamics and controller info, including me. To me LASS doesn't come alive until (to quote John Powell I believe) the controller panes "look like the ***ing Alps" - it can sound very flat and unconvincing otherwise. Add in your EQ and room to liberal amounts of cc1, then it's pure magic. I'm sure HS is capable of much more too. It's not to criticise Daniel who's done a brilliant job, just a limitation of this kind of tutorial.

Oddly, the reverse might be true of Symphobia. That library is instant hit. You can play a chord and melt. But it's perhaps a little harder to make it sing... s1 can't handle legato leads at all, that's for sure, and s2 has no dymanic range on its own legatos. So it's horses for courses... HS and LASS share similar ground, but Symphobia is a very different animal.


----------



## Daniel James (May 14, 2011)

Ashermusic @ Sat May 14 said:


> OK, I only have a couple of minutes to answer this as my daughter is getting married next week and I have a lot to do.
> 
> Daniel, I take you at your word that you mean to be fair but the end result is not.
> 
> ...



Hey Jay,

Firstly I can appreciate your concerns however you will understand that I have to take your opinion based on the fact you are an EW Employee.

1. Personally to me they actually do sound pretty similar. If you rewatch the video however I state many times that I actually prefer the slightly softer tone of HS but the difference in tone does not justify the extra time or system resource required to get it... particularly when the sound of the competition is pretty similar but with much lighter restrictions.

2. I think using the same midi file was a fair way to demonstrate the difference (or lack therof) of the raw out of the box tone. I added no extra post processing or library specific features to either MIDI file which was IMO the fairest way to compare.

3. If you dont mind here I will refer to the disclaimer at the beginning of the video which is "I will be showing these libraries how I use them". When I compose I boot up an ensemble string patch and get a few ideas in, thats the way I work and it works great for me. I am not writing for a real string section, I am writing for a sampled string section so making it good is more important to me than sounding real...Symphobia seems to nail this on the head just fine, the fact that HS does not because 'I'm using it wrong' doesnt matter one bit to me...because thats the way I do use it, and its not the best for the way I work (in fact it probably would be as I mention in the video if the load time and footprint was not so bad)

4. Of course you can use what ever sounds you like to achieve whatever sounds you want. If you think the Omnisphere strings sound great, the awesome, use them! use what you think gives you the best result...regardless of how old or lower in price they maybe.

5. The fact that PLAY is faster in the Beta, while exciting, does not factor into my opinion right now...as I do not have the BETA and so can only comment on what I have to use right now. I am aware many 'pros' (I get paid to write music does that not class me as pro) offset the system resource to other machines and the such...however like I say, in my personal opinion the minimal difference in tone does not justify me changing my entire system and workflow for the sake of using one library, when as I demonstrated there are other options out there that can produce similar end results on my current system.

Just as a final point you say that you are taking issue with my methodology and conclusions. Firstly the way I write music and the methods in which I go about it are of course just that...they are my personal way of working. I do not expect every composer to work like me, which is why I mentioned this as a disclaimer at the start of the vid, I can only do things my way.

As for my conclusions, I think personally its fair to say that every single negative comment I make about either library, in the video, is backed up with examples and demonstrations. 

Again I hope you understand this is not me attempting to challenge your words as a personal opinion, but as an EW Employee. You will have to appreciate that I have to conciser your comments as having a certain degree of bias.

Dan


----------



## zvenx (May 14, 2011)

noiseboyuk @ Sat May 14 said:


> Hi Richard - a few people have gone on about the dynamics and controller info, including me. To me LASS doesn't come alive until (to quote John Powell I believe) the controller panes "look like the ***ing Alps" - it can sound very flat and unconvincing otherwise. Add in your EQ and room to liberal amounts of cc1, then it's pure magic. I'm sure HS is capable of much more too. It's not to criticise Daniel who's done a brilliant job, just a limitation of this kind of tutorial.
> 
> Oddly, the reverse might be true of Symphobia. That library is instant hit. You can play a chord and melt. But it's perhaps a little harder to make it sing... s1 can't handle legato leads at all, that's for sure, and s2 has no dymanic range on its own legatos. So it's horses for courses... HS and LASS share similar ground, but Symphobia is a very different animal.



Hi Guy I did read that you and a few other ppl did say that. but if he had to do it for both libraries, I dont' imagine it would be a 28 minute video and I am sure Daniel may have actual paying work to use in that time .. point taken....but I am sure the same can be said for HS... I am curious to hear what 1.9 will bring... from what I understand and I could be wrong , is that Andrew is adding Convolution technology to allow one to more radically change teh sound of LASS if so desired?

RE: Symphobia, that's why I said it would be the first not the only one to buy for me...It would be the base and the others the icing on a cake..most of what I do would be better served by the instant wow factor that Symphobia has..

rsp


----------



## Ashermusic (May 14, 2011)

Daniel James @ Sat May 14 said:


> Ashermusic @ Sat May 14 said:
> 
> 
> > OK, I only have a couple of minutes to answer this as my daughter is getting married next week and I have a lot to do.
> ...



1. First of all, the reason I came to their attention and now am an EW employee is that I wrote this kind of thing in defense of their stuff, Kirk Hunter's stuff, etc. just because I believe in fair play. Long time members here will confirm that, and it was also true of what I wrote on Gearslutz and lots of forums. Just as I did not question your motives, I hope you will not question mine. Notice I made no value judgements on the sound of the libraries, only said that they clearly sound very different. If someone prefers LASS' sound, fine, I have zero problem with that. 

2. Two things we are going to have to agree to disagree with each other. IMHO, they sound nothing alike. Secondly, the MIDI file methodology is unfair to both IMHO.

3. You certainly have the right to work as you like and I am not saying it is not valid. I am saying HS is primarily intended for those who know what real string sections do and write generally with that in mind, so it is perhaps, even if all other things are disregarded, a better choice for a guy me than a guy like you. It is a different mindset, not better necessarily, but definitely different.

4. Again, IMHO, you would be wise to be using VE Pro or Bidule as a secondary host even if you are not using Play stuff. The advantages have been well documented here a number of times so I will not rehash.

5. My pointing out the betas are faster loading is just for people's info so that they know that what is seen in your video will reasonably soon no longer an accurate picture.


----------



## Mr. Anxiety (May 14, 2011)

Nice work Daniel; and the commentary on this forum thread is completely predictable, as you probably knew going into this project. I'm not being sarcastic or smug...... the comments are warranted and valid.

I have a question for Ashermusic.....

How would you propose to do this video shoot-out; what would make it more "fair", but also appropriate for the majority of users (current or potential) of these libraries?

Curious.......


----------



## JohnG (May 14, 2011)

Hi Daniel,

I'm sort of with zvenx -- I understand what you're doing with the video and using the quick and dirty patches, but I don't actually think they sound anything alike. 

I also can't quite agree with the idea that "in a mix" the difference won't be audible, unless perhaps you are talking about a drums / guitars track with some strings, or maybe an Epic Trailer Track or something else with enormous amounts of other stuff going on. In that context, the strings that come in Omnisphere sound great -- no absolute requirement for any dedicated string library at all.

By contrast, if you're going for something beautiful and touching, or just something that blends elegantly, I think there's a clear winner with the raw samples. Moreover, to be fair to LASS, if you EQ it that improves the sound (the violins particularly) quite considerably to my ear.

Definitely looking forward to those faster PLAY 3 load times though!

Cheers

(Note: I recently received a free copy of QL Spaces from EW)


----------



## Daniel James (May 14, 2011)

Mr. Anxiety @ Sat May 14 said:


> Nice work Daniel; and the commentary on this forum thread is completely predictable, as you probably knew going into this project. I'm not being sarcastic or smug...... the comments are warranted and valid.
> 
> I have a question for Ashermusic.....
> 
> ...



Hey Mr Anxiety,

I fully welcome these type of debates, they give developers a chance to see what a section of their user base and potential customers are saying about their work and how its being compared to other products...which in the long run should hopefully lead to better products for us end users in the long run.

Before I uploaded this video I fully expected, and indeed received, many negative comments. The main reason people would be annoyed with my video is they may feel a need to justify their purchase and if I say something negative they may feel a need to protect their investment (The same as if you buy an expensive car and Top Gear gives it a bad review and says its not cool...you get annoyed at Top Gear even if you agree with them on everything else)

All in all this is a topic many are curious about and I am trying to be as fair as possible.

Dan


----------



## Daniel James (May 14, 2011)

JohnG @ Sat May 14 said:


> Hi Daniel,
> 
> I'm sort of with zvenx -- I understand what you're doing with the video and using the quick and dirty patches, but I don't actually think they sound anything alike.
> 
> ...



Hey John, 

Like you say the sound of LASS can be improved with EQ just as much as HS can be made to sound better with more attention paid to CC. At the end of the day, with time you can make pretty much anything work in a mix. As long as the end result sounds good I don't think the end user would notice any difference. 

At the end of the day we need to keep in mind that both libraries are recordings of the same thing...string instruments. I personally think the quality of both libraries are so high that the average user would not tell the difference, they would just hear a string instrument.

Dan


----------



## noiseboyuk (May 14, 2011)

Daniel James @ Sat May 14 said:


> At the end of the day we need to keep in mind that both libraries are recordings of the same thing...string instruments. I personally think the quality of both libraries are so high that the average user would not tell the difference, they would just hear a string instrument.



I think Dan is right. I can hear a distinct difference between the two libraries, HS is more lush. But they are both capable of beautifully expressive playing, and LASS's tone suits some material better I'd argue. I only have LASS Lite, and it's a cinch to get a nice flowing line. But I agree with Dan in that if you don't put them against each other as an A / B... I'd bet the farm that most listeners would neither know or care.

And that's not to belittle the importance of detail - I only say it because both libraries are extremely good. The differences in tone are most stark when you A/B them. And given that... all the other factors become the deciding ones for many of us.


----------



## JohnG (May 14, 2011)

Daniel James @ 14th May 2011 said:


> At the end of the day we need to keep in mind that both libraries are recordings of the same thing...string instruments. I personally think the quality of both libraries are so high that the average user would not tell the difference, they would just hear a string instrument.
> 
> Dan



well -- I don't agree at all with that Dan! I have all three of these libraries and they are all indeed quite good, but I think the difference in sound actually is decisive depending on what you're going for. 

And what the situation is.

For final delivery, or when it's necessary to impress someone paying for the orchestra, the sound difference can be very important. This is especially true if you are talking about a project in which the mockup will have only marginal live players to supplement the electronics.

On the other hand, there are other circumstances when the differences in sound wouldn't matter much -- "just writing" or doing a mockup when you know for sure all the strings are going to get replaced. Or if you're going for a hybrid sound in which a processed string sound is desirable. In the latter case, synth strings are often very good sounding and usually a lot easier to wrangle.


----------



## Daniel James (May 14, 2011)

JohnG @ Sat May 14 said:


> Daniel James @ 14th May 2011 said:
> 
> 
> > At the end of the day we need to keep in mind that both libraries are recordings of the same thing...string instruments. I personally think the quality of both libraries are so high that the average user would not tell the difference, they would just hear a string instrument.
> ...



Hey John,

I think this topic may come down to personal preference. I mean I personally think that if the music sounds good and the end result is great then which library you use is not as important as you are making out. I think both HS and LASS are both capable of handling all situations from soft to epic and producing a great result. But again you are more than free to your opinion, as am I :D

I am not sure how much of my work you follow but I am very much a hybrid composer so perhaps this has a strong influence on my opinion. To me at the end of the day its all just sound, and if you can make it sound good I think the listener doesn't care too much which library you use so long as the music works. As composers we are so used to focusing on the semantics that we forget most people dont care like we do :D

Dan


----------



## Ed (May 14, 2011)

I thought the video was extremely helpful.

Even though I also felt that using the same MIDI data was a bit of a no no I have been around samples long enough to know what not to judge a sample by, so while the modwheel tremolo section was a bit of a fail when it came to Hollywood Strings because of that, even after copying the data to the correct channel (which just seemed to control volume) it still taught me something about how the library *worked* and how I can expect it to sound if I first got it.

While my system would be able to run HS better and when running VE PRO I'm pretty sure it wouldn't lock my system up while stuff loads, the long load times and massive patch sizes tells me what I could probably expect in respect to performance. What I found most shocking was how tiny LASS's patches were, especially the full strings patch, while the HS version was huge for no apparent reason and I think Dan touched upon that in the video. I would love to know why it has to be that big and if its less than efficiant editing or programming I wonder if that tells us something about why the other patches are so damn huge, maybe the patch contained each mic position as well? Otherwise, I don't get it...

While I do much prefer the sound of HS to LASS (though I don't know about the short notes) even though I don't feel this came accross in the video, what it did remind me of is what i do when I first get a library. I *would *be disapointed with HS when i first got it, while I would be very impressed with LASS. LASS seems much more playable from what this video shows and performance does have a big part to play in that. Long load times and massive CPU and RAM footprint does not make me happy about writing music. I, like Dan, will not buy a compiter just for one library or leave it on permanently. I just can't work that way.

I'm not the first person to say this but there is something to be said for super fast load times and a great sound being better and much more preferable than a really really good sound and horendous load times and a buggy interphase. To me I am excited about Hollywood Brass but with CS Brass it seems to be everything I like about Symphobia only as detailed as a full, proper brass library. That's why its probably going to be the library for me. Symphobia is so awesome because its got that great sound out of the box, you only need to load one or two patches and its footprint and performance is *extremely *good. With CS Brass I can see it being the same, but with a library like Hollywood Brass even though I'm sure it will be easier to use than Hollywood Strings I can see my frustration with it will really mess up my creativity, which libraries like Symphobia help so much. Worse still basing your system around a library that causes such difficulties means your entire process slows down for just that one library. 

All in all I don't think it reallys show which library sounds better in those tests, *but *I think the video certainly does very well in show us which is instantly more efficant and performs better *and *what one can expect loading up initial patches and playing around with them. Showing us on a less than epic system only makes this better, because systems that are unrealistically powerful always make me wonder if I'll ever be able to even load a single patch sometimes! This video actually made me think HS performed better than I thought it would!


----------



## synergy543 (May 14, 2011)

JohnG @ Sat May 14 said:


> (Note: I recently received a free copy of QL Spaces from EW)


Sweet! I wonder what that inspires? Why did you receive it?

Daniel James should receive a free copy of QL Spaces too for taking his time to demonstrate the realities and not give us an monetarly-influnenced and biased sales pitch. 
Honesty and integrity are actually worth more than just QL Spaces. Maybe he should get EWQLSO Platinum Kontakt version?

btw, I was using the PLAY Pianos yesterday and suddenly got a terrible earful of white noise which is terriblyly disconcerting and extremely unprofessional. Its a good thing this didn't happen during Daniel's demo. Keep your fingers crossed.


----------



## Craig Sharmat (May 14, 2011)

well what has not been mentioned is HS loads 5 mic positions and that probably has a lot to do with load time. The gold version (one mic position) against Lass 16 bit may be a fairer test.


----------



## germancomponist (May 14, 2011)

Craig Sharmat @ Sat May 14 said:


> well what has not been mentioned is HS loads 5 mic positions and that probably has a lot to do with load time. The gold version (one mic position) against Lass 16 bit may be a fairer test.



Oh,

I didn`t notice this. You are right! 

I like comparisons very much, but they have to be fair!


----------



## Treb (May 14, 2011)

Craig Sharmat @ Sat May 14 said:


> well what has not been mentioned is HS loads 5 mic positions and that probably has a lot to do with load time. The gold version (one mic position) against Lass 16 bit may be a fairer test.



I don't see how this is relevant/factually correct. Even in HS Diamond, loading a single patch loads only one mic position by default, not all 5 at once. If Daniel had loaded all 5 mic positions in this demo, it would have taken 5x longer than what it was already taking.


----------



## Mr. Anxiety (May 14, 2011)

We also don't know if we are comparing apples to apples with the ram loaded amount.

Kontakt might be calculating this differently than Play........ who knows?

Mr A


----------



## Ed (May 14, 2011)

Treb @ Sat May 14 said:


> Craig Sharmat @ Sat May 14 said:
> 
> 
> > well what has not been mentioned is HS loads 5 mic positions and that probably has a lot to do with load time. The gold version (one mic position) against Lass 16 bit may be a fairer test.
> ...




:shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock:


----------



## RiffWraith (May 14, 2011)

Hey DJ - cool vid - thanks for doing this!

I am actually a bit surprised at some of the backlash Daniel has gotten here. I mean, how many of the rest of you have contributed as much as Daniel has? How many of you have spent the time and effort creating tutorials and vids? Not that I am opposed to debate, nor am I opposed to anyone voicing their opinion, but I mean.....

So, I took a small section of the vid @ 720p, and came up with this:

http://www.jeffreyhayat.com/DJames-LASSvsHS.wav

Do they sound the same? No. LASS has some more high freqs., and the argument can be made that HS is a bit warmer. Which is better, IMHO? Neither. But the point here is they DO sound similiar. I am sure there are patches that sound very dissimiliar, but anyone that says the strings in that ^ example sound _nothing alike _needs to have their hearing checked.

Tho, the one thing that did stand out to me was the tuning issues. In HS, that is.

Cheers.


----------



## A_Fool_With_Tools (May 14, 2011)

Hey Daniel,

Good work on the vid, thanks for that.

When this new 64bit PLay update finally arrives.... perhaps you can revisit this video and compare again?

Also dude, if you plan on a RAM upgrade, i'd recommend this company www.transintl.com 

They are an American company, so you could send it to a friend in the States & get them to Fedex it to you stating its value is below $20 for you to avoid DutyTax!

I currently have 3x8GB sticks in my MacPro running VEPro, most VIs run great even Play, but i don't own HS yet!

Thanks again for your efforts with the vids


A Fool


----------



## KMuzzey (May 14, 2011)

Craig Sharmat @ Sat May 14 said:


> well what has not been mentioned is HS loads 5 mic positions and that probably has a lot to do with load time. The gold version (one mic position) against Lass 16 bit may be a fairer test.



Hey Craig,

Only 1 mic position is loaded by default, and that's what Dan's vid showed. If you trigger the other mic positions, each one loads with a new status bar. Interestingly though, his Hwood Strings automatically loads the MIDS mic, and mine automatically loads the MAIN mic. I prefer the sound of the MIDS. Anyone know how to change your HS Diamond setup so that it defaults to loading MIDS instead of main? Can't figure that one out...

Kerry


----------



## Craig Sharmat (May 14, 2011)

sorry about that, i am having an issue with my play seeing my gold edtion and behaving oddly.


----------



## Daniel James (May 14, 2011)

Craig Sharmat @ Sat May 14 said:


> sorry about that, i am having an issue with my play seeing my gold edtion and behaving oddly.



Yeah its ok Craig. Just to clarify though. When I load a patch it will load in one mic position. If I want more I have to click the 'on' button under its fader at which point I then have to let it load the next mic position in. Takes about the same about of time and really adds to the memoryò é   ÁÕ é   Â


----------



## noiseboyuk (May 14, 2011)

vrocko @ Sat May 14 said:


> This is so true the mod wheel makes all the difference. I had the same revelation not too long ago.



When First Chair loads, it defaults to fff - you play a few notes and go "yikes". But then you dial back and work it baby... and it's a totally different animal. So much character in those instruments, Andrew and co did a stunning job.


----------



## Lex (May 14, 2011)

Nice video! 

One thing....in the video you state that you will be using full version of LASS and then you go on and basically start demonstrating LASS lite.
The divisi patches in LASS, when used in unison and set up right, sound nothing like the lite full section patches you are using, and the mem footprint is 3 times bigger per section.

alex


----------



## zvenx (May 14, 2011)

RiffWraith @ Sat May 14 said:


> Hey DJ - cool vid - thanks for doing this!
> 
> I am actually a bit surprised at some of the backlash Daniel has gotten here. I mean, how many of the rest of you have contributed as much as Daniel has? How many of you have spent the time and effort creating tutorials and vids? Not that I am opposed to debate, nor am I opposed to anyone voicing their opinion, but I mean.....
> ........
> ...



couldn't agree with you more.
rsp


----------



## Joe S (May 14, 2011)

I agree with all the comments about PLAY and hope the new version will be better. However, this video does not even remotely access the magic of HS. Let's load a big HS patch and then only access one of the 10 layers so everyone can comment on how soft it sounds. It's just plain stupid and as a result most of the comments here are stupid. If you want to compare LASS and HS, you need to render a strings only lyrical piece with both libraries and spend time with each version to get the most out of both of them. Then post each with some tasteful reverb.


----------



## robibla (May 14, 2011)

Daniel has stated many times that he was comparing both libraries in the exact situation that he would use them. I think he did mention though that he would do a full string comparison in the future.


----------



## Joe S (May 14, 2011)

OK. I guess I am wondering why he bought so many string libraries then. Because lass and and symphobia sound just fine for what he is doing.


----------



## zvenx (May 14, 2011)

as the cliche goes. no good deed goes unpunished.
rsp


----------



## Daniel James (May 14, 2011)

Joe S @ Sat May 14 said:


> OK. I guess I am wondering why he bought so many string libraries then. Because lass and and symphobia sound just fine for what he is doing.



I like the sound of Hollywood Strings as I mentioned over and over again. Also things like the bow change legato and slurred legato sounded like things I wanted and didnt already have (although truth be told I was doing fine without them bit dammit I wanted to treat myself). 

Keep in mind I am a consumer here, something the many people who have sent me obscene and abusive personal messages seem to forget.... I am showing how the two libraries are stacking up together in my environment. I am not an official media outlet nor a professional reviewer, I just fit in a quick video here and there when I have time...oh yeah I do actually work too  

@Joe S: Just to make sure you aware that part one is called the General Comparison and not the Full Overall Comparison right XD Also AGAIN let me refer to the disclaimer at the start of the video, I will be showing the libraries in the confines of my working environment so PLEASE don't tell me what I 'need' to do, I am fine with suggestions but I dont appreciate people coming at me with an angry tone telling me what I need to be doing.

@Lex: I am aware LASS full comes into its own when you are using divisi but in the interest of fairness I wanted to use the lightest patches to start off with to show the differences in RAM usage at the low end.

P.S sorry for the more irritated tone in my voice this evening. Had to reply to so many personal message from Youtube, email and here of people telling me 'I'm doing it wrong' or that I am "A biased faggot" ...funny enough the majority of the abuse is coming from owners of one of the libraries over the other (I wont say which)

Dan


----------



## Joe S (May 14, 2011)

Wow. Sorry. Who sent the nasty messages?? Doug Rogers? LOL One thing I noticed is that when people compare sounds, it's important the levels are equal.


----------



## Daniel James (May 14, 2011)

Joe S @ Sat May 14 said:


> Wow. Sorry. Who sent the nasty messages?? Doug Rogers? LOL One thing I noticed is that when people compare sounds, it's important the levels are equal.



Im not going to name names but I will say its none of the developers..from those I have spoken to they have been extremely open and understanding, which I greatly respect.

Dan


----------



## synthnut (May 14, 2011)

I am seeing a lot of importance put on the actual sound of each program ...... and those who say that " this will sound better with that, and the other program would do better with a different EQ, and the next program is different altogether ......Then they all sound pretty much the same" , etc etc etc .... ......

One thing that has been pretty much overlooked is how player friendly is each of these programs..... I think that many folks who bought Symphobia bought it because it was dead simple to sound like a million bucks !!.....It did not take up a lot of space and needed very little to run, and it was dependable .......LASS also was very simple to use , and had more of a variety of programs to pick from and was also very lean on memory use and was also dependable .....Enter Hollywood Strings ....Everyone LOVES the sound of Hollywood Strings , but nobody likes Play, as it's a memory hog , and it is NOT dependable .... 

This reminds me of a friend of mine on the job who was BRILLIANT at what he did , but was not dependable ....My boss at the time fired hm ...I went to the boss and mentioned the fact that my friend was the most skilled guy on the job and why did he fire him ....He pointed to another worker on the job and said " What do you think of Tommy ? " ....I told him that Tommy couldn't hold a candle to my buddy who just got fired ....The boss said that he would take 100 guys just like Tommy before he would hire another guy like my buddy !!......When I asked why he explained ....." I can get more work done with a guy like Tommy , because he is dependable , and he comes in everyday, and does exactly what I tell him to do " " He may not be the best at what he does , but he get's the job done " .....

I have been screwed over time and time again by technology and software that does not work properly .....I would rather have good sounding music that I can be proud of, and finish , rather than having the BEST SOUNDING MUSIC , that I can never finish because of all the problems it creates along the way !!...... Jim


----------



## Ashermusic (May 14, 2011)

Daniel James @ Sat May 14 said:


> [quote="Joe S @ Sat May 14, 2011 5:16 pm"
> P.S sorry for the more irritated tone in my voice this evening. Had to reply to so many personal message from Youtube, email and here of people telling me 'I'm doing it wrong' or that I am "A biased faggot" ...funny enough the majority of the abuse is coming from owners of one of the libraries over the other (I wont say which)
> 
> Dan



That is disgusting!! You didn't murder anyone, you expressed opinions. Whether I agree or disagree with them, you do not deserve that, Dan.


----------



## David Story (May 14, 2011)

Again, I'm grateful to Dan for an informative, entertaining video. I hope he does more, since this is the kind of comparison that I do myself when choosing patches for my template.

The discussion speaks volumes as to where our profession is.

People who have heard lots of real violins hear a huge difference between the Symphobia, LASS and HS patches. In a word: smooth, hard, soft. Not subtle differences. 

Those who seen to have little live experience hear them as similar, especially LASS and HS.

I can hear it both ways, as a novice and experienced listener. But it takes an effort to not attend to details that I'm sensitive to.

People who don't really care about what used to be a big deal, appear to be in the majority. And that's a good thing, business-wise. Work with the samples you have, not concerned if it sounds real. In fact, sounding real is redefined as "the best sample library today". You can make good music with that approach.

The downside is that we lose the art of violin playing. 

(I predict that people won't even care enough about this to send hate mail, like they did when the best libraries were at stake)

EDIT:
I'm really doing my best to embrace the new aesthetic, but it is a huge change.


----------



## José Herring (May 14, 2011)

David Story @ Sat May 14 said:


> EDIT:
> I'm really doing my best to embrace the new aesthetic, but it is a huge change.



You and me both.

And yes that was the most objectionable part of an other wise excellent video. Sorry Daniel but there's a huge difference between the sound of LASS and HS even in the video. I think that they both have use but the difference to me between the two is night and day.

And sorry for the hate mail you got. Wtf people? They're samples. It's not like he offended the prophet Mohammad.


----------



## Ashermusic (May 14, 2011)

RiffWraith @ Sat May 14 said:


> Do they sound the same? No. LASS has some more high freqs., and the argument can be made that HS is a bit warmer. Which is better, IMHO? Neither. But the point here is they DO sound similiar. I am sure there are patches that sound very dissimiliar, but anyone that says the strings in that ^ example sound _nothing alike _needs to have their hearing checked.
> 
> Tho, the one thing that did stand out to me was the tuning issues. In HS, that is.
> 
> Cheers.



i was going to answer this but David and Jose' did it for me. I guess all three of us need to have our hearing checked

The funny thing is about 6 months ago a friend of mine who is the former musical director of the Glendale Symphony came over to my place to hear some string libraries as he was in the market for new ones. Without reverb and without comment before he played them I loaded up HS, KH CSII, LASS and Sonic Implants and let him play them for a bit.

His first comment was something like , "wow, they each sound so different." I must remember to call him and tell him he needs to have his hearing checked as well.

My point is Riffwraith, you can disagree without having to attempt to be insulting. It does not do you credit as a person when you do so nor does it add weight to your opinion.


----------



## Ashermusic (May 14, 2011)

Mr. Anxiety @ Sat May 14 said:


> Nice work Daniel; and the commentary on this forum thread is completely predictable, as you probably knew going into this project. I'm not being sarcastic or smug...... the comments are warranted and valid.
> 
> I have a question for Ashermusic.....
> 
> ...



That is a toughie. I think that it is nearly impossible to do fairly because they work so differently. I guess I would play in a part from a score with each section, using the CCss as designed and then attempt to play the exact same parts on the other doing the same. Then maybe add reverb to both.

Unfortunately other than listening to demos made by those who really know the libraries well, like the T.J.s and Colin O'Malleys of the world, there is no real substitute for getting your hands on it for a while, learning how it works best, and then deciding what you like and don't like about the sound and the workflow.


----------



## David Story (May 14, 2011)

Ashermusic @ Sat May 14 said:


> RiffWraith @ Sat May 14 said:
> 
> 
> > Do they sound the same? No. LASS has some more high freqs., and the argument can be made that HS is a bit warmer. Which is better, IMHO? Neither. But the point here is they DO sound similiar. I am sure there are patches that sound very dissimiliar, but anyone that says the strings in that ^ example sound _nothing alike _needs to have their hearing checked.
> ...



I am convinced that RiffWraith and Jay do perceive the sound very differently. There are people who know live instruments, and people who know sampled sound. And few who know both equally well. 

It will take patience and a lot of listening to keep the channels open. On one level, HS and LASS are the best string libraries, and very similar. In a mix, they can serve as convincing strings.
But from the point of view of subtle, expressive string timbres, they are different. Difficult to make them sound the same.

I hope people will go to live concerts, and listen to what great performers do with violins, violas, celli and basses. It's supercool, and emotional.

Samples can do things live players can't, and that can be cool too.

I like sample library demos made by new users, since a mockup virtuoso is way beyond where I am when I open it for the first time. A live virtuoso is also beyond where the sample guy is, in my opinion. But that's based on the aesthetic of live performing artists.


----------



## ChrisAxia (May 14, 2011)

I am horrified to hear Daniel has been receiving abusive emails about this. That's so unnecessary, but I have to agree with Jay and others that the video does not show either library in the best light. I too have both and they sound very different! However, drenched in reverb and using just a single line with little expression, many will not hear how dissimilar they really are. 

~Chris


----------



## David Story (May 14, 2011)

It's really useful to hear what it sounds like before you spend months learning it. I like to know what I'm getting now, not what it might be someday. Just my workflow, but there are other folks who like this approach.

To me, the cost of a new system and months of practice may be greater than hiring a good violinist.


----------



## rabiang (May 14, 2011)

abusing people how says something negative about EW or play is an industry standard.


----------



## tripit (May 15, 2011)

Daniel, I enjoyed the video, and more so because you take the time to put something together, which is more than I can say about myself or most others. 

AS for the assaults, I think we have more than our share of OCD types. Unfortunately, a lot of them can't get out of the way of their own obsessiveness and have a penchant for taking everything personally. 

Ignore them, they are morons who aren't worth the tiny little minds they occupy.


----------



## noiseboyuk (May 15, 2011)

I just feel like questioning what I perceive as an emerging received wisdom which is that HS sounds better but is harder to use. I'm not yet convinced it sounds "better". It's smoother, more lush. But I've heard staggeringly good - and realistic - stuff with full LASS in particular. HS cannot match LASS for divisi writing - 4 true separate sections including first chair verses 2 sections separated by mics only (and LASS'sauto-divisi is a killer trick). LASS is also obviously better at the smaller, more intimate sections. The Audiobro demo for building a legato line also gives pause for thought - again, HS has nothing to directly compete with humanising each of the 4 patches per section, and the "never the same" very realistic final result.

I'm not therefore arguing LASS is "better", cos you can easily come along with a list of positive HS attributes. That's not the point. The point is that sound-wise they have different strengths, but both are excellent libraries PURELY from a sound perspective. Then (and only then) you need to factor in anything else. Of course one person might prefer the tone of one over the other, but I don't think you build an objective case that this makes one a definitively better sound in all environments.

As to Daniel receiving abusive messages... these things usually happen when someone is writing from a position of weakness, imho, and they therefore defensively lash out. Take it is a horrible but backhanded compliment!


----------



## ChrisAxia (May 15, 2011)

As Guy says, there is no 'better'. Whatever works for you and the situation. Here's a short MP3 http://www.keepandshare.com/doc/2808875/lass-hs-comparison-chris-nicolaides-mp3-may-15-2011-9-50-am-3-9-meg (http://www.keepandshare.com/doc/2808875 ... am-3-9-meg) which starts with a LASS based cue for 30 seconds, then cross fades into an HS cue I'm currently working on. I'm sure you will immediately hear the difference, even though they are very different types of music, and I don't think there is another string library that has cellos like HS.

I just love the sound which is why they are perhaps a little too loud in the second piece! I will definitely lower the level for the final mix. Anyway, I cannot get anywhere near this sound with any other library I have (though I don't have them all) and doubtless someone here will say that there are libs that can sound like this.

For more intimate cues, I find myself using LASS for staccatos and HS for legato lines and they blend very nicely together. As I said, whatever works. Both are excellent libraries. Just make sure you have plenty of RAM if you get HS!

~Chris


----------



## vlado hudec (May 15, 2011)

the guys, which don't agree with Daniel's approach in his video, could do their own video comparison, from their style of writing, it would be very helpful for other guys here. 

the more videos, the better


----------



## johnhamilton (May 15, 2011)

Joe S @ Sun 15 May said:


> OK. I guess I am wondering why he bought so many string libraries then. Because lass and and symphobia sound just fine for what he is doing.



You can never have too many sample libraries.

@Dan I agree with you that Hollywood strings have a real gorgeous and smooth legato, great video mate.


----------



## TheUnfinished (May 15, 2011)

I'm not surprised that Dan has received crappy emails via YouTube, because it's douchebag central. But anyone from VI who has sent him abusive and agressive messages is pathetic.

Sending an abusive email about someone's opinions of a smaple library? Seriously, next you'll be sending letters written in blood to CEOs of crisp manufacturers who no longer make a flavour you used to like. Weird.

@Chris Nicolaides... Nice writing, and really well mixed. Fancy braving some hate mail and doing a tutorial on your mixing process? It's very very nicely done.


----------



## rJames (May 15, 2011)

David Story @ Sat May 14 said:


> Again, I'm grateful to Dan for an informative, entertaining video. I hope he does more, since this is the kind of comparison that I do myself when choosing patches for my template.
> 
> The discussion speaks volumes as to where our profession is.
> 
> ...



No doubt. Also, people who have heard lots of violins can hear a difference in each violin (and each player for that matter). So, its natural that each library will have differences.

East West (I think) went out on a limb here creating the library of the future. Whether its all tuned up yet, I have no idea. But to have the degree of control that it gives you would be awesome. And when computers catch up, I'll have it unless a new library supplants it.

But for now its too much trouble. We'll see how Hollywood Brass goes but it looks like the Mikes already have that covered.

Refer back to Jay's thread about "ease of use/flexibility."

I, for one, want to work on music not on computers.

Video didin't kill radio, TV didn't kill movie theaters (yet). Violin playing will survive and live players will be the premium.


----------



## adg21 (May 15, 2011)

vlado hudec @ Sun May 15 said:


> the guys, which don't agree with Daniel's approach in his video, could do their own video comparison, from their style of writing, it would be very helpful for other guys here.
> 
> the more videos, the better



Although not a video comparison I found rohan's comparison's of HS Vs LASS one of the best comparison's to date, it's on the The new HS update is GREAT! thread. Hopefully he wont mind me quoting them...



stevenson-again @ Thu Apr 28 said:


> > http://idisk.mac.com/rohan.stevenson/Public/stuff/TheFairytaleEndsLASS.mp3 (Fairytale Ends LASS)
> >
> > http://idisk.mac.com/rohan.stevenson/Public/stuff/TheFairytaleEndsHS.mp3 (Fairytale Ends HS)
> 
> ...



Maybe they should, by default, have those upper mids tamed a bit as I don't think I'm the only one who first thing is to switch off that bright Kontakt EQ and add an EQ plugin to pull it down.

Youtube has, and will always have, a repulsive comments section Dan, please don't let it put you off making more videos!


----------



## ChrisAxia (May 15, 2011)

TheUnfinished @ Sun May 15 said:


> @Chris Nicolaides... Nice writing, and really well mixed. Fancy braving some hate mail and doing a tutorial on your mixing process? It's very very nicely done.



Thank you for the kind words, but I don't think my stuff sounds especially good, and I'm going to be revamping my whole template after the summer when my current projects are over. I also don't have the time nor energy to do what Daniel has so generously done.

Re: Rohan's very nice pieces - am I the only one that hears strange phasing in the LASS versions as a result of the drastic EQing necessary to make LASS violins sound smooth? 

~Chris


----------



## JonFairhurst (May 15, 2011)

Daniel,

Consider posting your next video on Vimeo, rather that YouTube. For videos with a specific audience, I find that I get more hits on Vimeo than YouTube. YouTube has a larger general audience, but this isn't always a good thing. Why play to the lowest common denominator?

One of my review videos on Vimeo got over 30,000 hits and not one comment was rude. It's well worth the $60 a year or so to deliver higher quality HD video without limits - and without YouTube. You can try it for free, but the free deal doesn't let you embed HD and it places bandwidth limits on HD uploads and plays.

Other than being a Plus member, I have no stake in Vimeo.


----------



## adg21 (May 15, 2011)

There is more in the way of forced Ads before you can play stuff in Vimeo isn't there?


----------



## Daniel James (May 15, 2011)

JonFairhurst @ Sun May 15 said:


> Daniel,
> 
> Consider posting your next video on Vimeo, rather that YouTube. For videos with a specific audience, I find that I get more hits on Vimeo than YouTube. YouTube has a larger general audience, but this isn't always a good thing. Why play to the lowest common denominator?
> 
> ...



Thank you for the suggestion, it is greatly appreciated, however I think I will probably stick with youtube because regardless of how immature a select few of the lowest common denominator may be, I still want my video to be as openly available and helpful as it can be.

Uploading to both on the otherhand would not be such a bad idea  I shall take a deeper look into it.

Dan


----------



## Ed (May 15, 2011)

JonFairhurst @ Sun May 15 said:


> It's well worth the $60 a year or so to deliver higher quality HD video without limits -.



Why would you want to pay money when youtube is free? and if you get really popular they pay YOU!


----------



## RiffWraith (May 15, 2011)

JonFairhurst @ Mon May 16 said:


> ...has anybody here made any money from YouTube? Ever?



Oooooh yeah. Serious. Well, yt hasn't paid me, but I have gotten a good deal of paying work from yt.

Cheers.


----------



## JonFairhurst (May 15, 2011)

RiffWraith @ Sun May 15 said:


> JonFairhurst @ Mon May 16 said:
> 
> 
> > ...has anybody here made any money from YouTube? Ever?
> ...



That's a different story. My son put his demo reel up on Vimeo and recently got an editing job from it. Not that it was a random contact. He was referred, sent the link, and the demo reel locked in the job.

I'm talking about posting a video that goes viral and having YouTube pay you. Anyone?


----------



## RiffWraith (May 15, 2011)

JonFairhurst @ Mon May 16 said:


> RiffWraith @ Sun May 15 said:
> 
> 
> > JonFairhurst @ Mon May 16 said:
> ...



Ah I see. You mean yt pays you if your vid goes viral? Really? How much...it's gotta be pennies, no?


----------



## JonFairhurst (May 16, 2011)

According to Answers.com
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_much_does_youtube_pay

Youtube's payout schedule:
$ 0.0033/1 view
$ 3/1,000 view
$33/ 10,000 views
$330/ 100,000 views
$3300/ 1,000,000 views

They start paying you only after the millionth view, and only if you're a YouTube partner.


EDIT: I think that answer is BS.

The YouTube page makes no promises about payments to partners...
http://www.youtube.com/t/partnerships_benefits


----------



## Stephen Baysted (May 16, 2011)

JonFairhurst @ Mon May 16 said:


> According to Answers.com
> http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_much_does_youtube_pay
> 
> Youtube's payout schedule:
> ...




>8o I best look into becoming a partner because some videos with my music on have 2, 3 and 6+ million views. Hmm.


----------



## adg21 (May 16, 2011)

Just a quick thought RE: load times of HS...
Isn't it 24 bit samples in the full version? Wouldn't things be a lot faster if they released it all as 16 bit, then we could buy much smaller SSDs for it too. Or am I wrong about that?


----------



## Ed (May 16, 2011)

JonFairhurst @ Sun May 15 said:


> Ed @ Sun May 15 said:
> 
> 
> > Why would you want to pay money when youtube is free? and if you get really popular they pay YOU!
> ...



If that's true that's probably because you have to pay $60 a year to post stuff! :lol: 

And btw youtube doesn't post any ads on your videos either, they only do that if you're a youtube partner or your video has qualified for revenue sharing and you decide to accept it and turn it on or not, in which case you probably won't mind as they'll be paying you. You can also decide to turn off revenue sharing on any video which will mean there will be no ads.

I don't know why you get the idea its a "film makers hangout" while youtube isn't, I've seen plenty of stuff on youtube that would be considered as such. But the proof is in the pudding (god i hate that expression), since its quite obvious that 99% of anything of any relevance or popularity *will *be on youtube, and if it gets popular (because its good, or funny) will usually *end up* on youtube.

Why? Because people actually watch youtube, and no one (compared to youtube audience) really gives a crap about other video sharing websites except a few fringe people that 1. want to be different 2. Want to have a video on their website that isn't hosted by youtube. 

The only time I have ever needed to go on Vimeo is the rare occasion someone has posted their music there and then posted a link here. The moral is, if* you want people to actually watch your videos* you need to go where the people are. 




> Today, there's not as much reason to go with Vimeo as there was in the past. When they started, they were HD and YouTube was SD. But still, I don't like ads stuck on my video, let alone the rotten comments.



Then you really only have 1 reason to go to Vimeo, the comments. The reason why you'll get less comments on Vimeo is because less people use Vimeo, and if it bothers you so much simply disable comments on youtube or remove comments and block people. 



> As far as YouTube paying me... has anybody here made any money from YouTube? Ever? Going viral is tough. You either need to get *really* lucky or pay people to seed it.



You really don't know enough about youtube...

Youtube is a business now for a great number of people. People at the upper end, like Philip DeFranco which is probably one the most successful youtubers must be raking in hundreds of thousands from youtube including sponsorship from company's that want to advertise because of the huge audience he has. He has a large office with employees, interns and editors all funded by income from youtube. Even small channels with videos only getting tens of thousands of subscribers apparently still makes enough liveable money according to the people who make the videos.

Now, channels like Dans would be very hard to get enough subscribers and views to get decent money from it. He would need way more content and a bunch of other stuff, but also because its the nature of certain subjects that get more money than others. It will also be hard to qualify for partnership until you get enough subscribers as well, which is also difficult.

Point is though, its free, there are no ads, its in HD and accessible to the largest audience. I don't get why Vimeo would ever be preferable.



> As far as accessibility goes, Vimeo is just as accessible as YouTube to the end viewer.



Absolutely wrong, unless you mean its just as easy to type in Vimeo, but then its just as easy to type in any website.


----------



## Ed (May 16, 2011)

JonFairhurst @ Mon May 16 said:


> They start paying you only after the millionth view,



Doesn't sound right, since what i have heard from actual youtube parthers that you don't really make significant money unless your videos are regularly getting over a hundred thousand views. Partners also aren't allowed to say exactly how much they make.



> The YouTube page makes no promises about payments to partners...
> http://www.youtube.com/t/partnerships_benefits



They didn't say that, what they say there is .... "_There are no guarantees under the YouTube Partner agreement *about how much* you will be paid_."..... which is correct. You could make next to no money from being a youtube Partner, a partner simply allows your video to get money from views and ad clicks. The more viewers you get the more money you can make.


----------



## Stephen Baysted (May 16, 2011)

[Sorry for hijacking the thread Daniel] - my publisher is now on the case and is confident money is due. o[])


----------



## Hicks (May 16, 2011)

No one wants to compare LASS, HS with Appassionata or even VSL Orchestral strings?


----------



## nickhmusic (May 16, 2011)

Hicks @ Mon May 16 said:


> No one wants to compare LASS, HS with Appassionata or even VSL Orchestral strings?



I own LASS full but not HS.

I have the basic VSL Orchestral strings that came with their Special Edition, as well as the Epic Orchestra version of Appassionata which gives you only some basic patches.

I would say, in my personal opinion, that LASS is far more expressive than VSL - particularly as LASS tends to sing with extensive use of CC1 (riding the mod-wheel) and CC11. 

I found that this was quite a revelation - and found the VSL strings I licensed to sound quite obviously sampled in comparison to LASS.

I have to say though that this isn't the case with their woodwinds, where IMHO VSL shines.


----------



## Mike Connelly (May 16, 2011)

Thanks for the great video, look forward to more on this topic. Sorry about the people losing their cool, they are just sample libraries, not religions.

I'd say that HS and LASS sound quite different out of the box. But with the right EQ I think many people would be surprised at how similar they can sound (if that's what you want). HS also benefits from having some great reverb settings included, it would be interesting to hear both with the same Spaces settings applied.



adg21 @ Mon May 16 said:


> Just a quick thought RE: load times of HS...
> Isn't it 24 bit samples in the full version? Wouldn't things be a lot faster if they released it all as 16 bit, then we could buy much smaller SSDs for it too. Or am I wrong about that?



The full version is 24 while Gold is 16. Owners of the full version get a second license and have the option to request Gold for that. Besides using Gold, Platinum users can put parts of the library (for example specific sections or mic positions) on SSD.

EWQLSO platinum had the option to pay extra to get the 16 bit samples, and they are switchable in the user interface (although there's no way to set 16 as a default).


----------



## JonFairhurst (May 16, 2011)

Wow, Ed. You're quite the YouTube booster. I prefer the higher signal to noise (of comments as well as content) of Vimeo - as well as the higher number of views that I get there. But it's not really an either/or thing, is it? Daniel had mentioned that he got a bunch of horrible comments, so I offered an alternative.

Back to the topic at hand, I'm looking forward to the next comparison. Will Symphobia win again?


----------



## Stephen Baysted (May 16, 2011)

nickhmusic @ Mon May 16 said:


> Hicks @ Mon May 16 said:
> 
> 
> > No one wants to compare LASS, HS with Appassionata or even VSL Orchestral strings?
> ...



To be fair to VSL, you're only using the cut down versions, with limited samples, (vastly) reduced articulations and fewer velocity layers. 

To answer Hicks. I have LASS, VSL orchs & Apps extended, HS Diamond, Symphobia and another library sitting in my template. VSL and LASS blend very well together. HS sounds lovely, but performance is a problem. You cannot have too many options.


----------



## KMuzzey (May 16, 2011)

LASS is my default for strings, but VSL stuff definitely has its place in the world! Any time I've written something where someone said "what are those strings?" invariably it turned out to be LASS + Appassionatas: LASS gives a great cutting top end, and the Appassionatas add some nice density on the bottom, especially for Violins. Try combining them, it yields a really nice result.

Kerry


----------



## synthnut (May 16, 2011)

There are cases whereby you can take various libraries and mix them together and the sum of the added parts is greater than the sum of each part .... Something in the realm of 1+1=3 ........ Then you have sections within the SAME string program, (LASS for example ) where you can mix 2 tones to strengthen one tone ......LASS adds the First Chair patches to other patches for added character .... Some folks like the First Chair patches on their own , but others don't .....For those who don't , they can utilize the First Chair patches for added character to another tone when mixing with another patch ....Then too , every library has it's ACE tone that sticks out in the crowd .....and no two ears hear the same thing , so what might work for me , might not work for you ..... So many variables and progrems, and so little money :( .....Jim


----------



## Daniel James (May 16, 2011)

KMuzzey @ Mon May 16 said:


> LASS is my default for strings, but VSL stuff definitely has its place in the world! Any time I've written something where someone said "what are those strings?" invariably it turned out to be LASS + Appassionatas: LASS gives a great cutting top end, and the Appassionatas add some nice density on the bottom, especially for Violins. Try combining them, it yields a really nice result.
> 
> Kerry



I use Symphobia as my main library, then augment with my other libraries haha contrary to what most people think I actually bought HS to use it...not to just bash it


----------



## adg21 (May 16, 2011)

Mike Connelly @ Mon May 16 said:


> The full version is 24 while Gold is 16. Owners of the full version get a second license and have the option to request Gold for that. Besides using Gold, Platinum users can put parts of the library (for example specific sections or mic positions) on SSD.
> 
> EWQLSO platinum had the option to pay extra to get the 16 bit samples, and they are switchable in the user interface (although there's no way to set 16 as a default).



It would be good to have the option of having it [full version] at 16 bit, with all mic positions, bow change legato, the whole kaboodle, it would reduce strain on resources a lot and make the thing cheaper to put on an SSD.


----------



## Ed (May 16, 2011)

JonFairhurst @ Mon May 16 said:


> Wow, Ed. You're quite the YouTube booster. I prefer the higher signal to noise (of comments as well as content) of Vimeo - as well as the higher number of views that I get there. But it's not really an either/or thing, is it? Daniel had mentioned that he got a bunch of horrible comments, so I offered an alternative.



As I said the reason he got lots of horrible comments is because more people use youtube and its really easy to comment, less people use Vimeo, thats all it is. There's probably also a younger demographic on youtube, but thats probably the only difference. Even if he had it on Vimeo I wouldn't comment either because i wouldn't want to bother to register.

Anyway, just to be clear 

Here's a BBC article on Philip DeFranco and how much youtubers can make:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/c ... 485376.stm

And here is his responce to that article:
http://youtu.be/zHmhIPBV3xo


----------



## JonFairhurst (May 16, 2011)

Ed @ Mon May 16 said:


> As I said the reason he got lots of horrible comments is because more people use youtube and its really easy to comment, less people use Vimeo, thats all it is.


 Comments don't scale with overall site viewership. They scale with views of the particular video. I get more views on Vimeo. And I get many comments, but no tasteless ones. 

Sorry to prolong this off-topic excursion. Looking forward to the next video Daniel, regardless of the host.


----------



## passenger57 (May 16, 2011)

I have both LASS and HS. They are both great, but nothing beats those massively powerful LASS spicc cello strings. The next update will even have more features. 
HS - is great for the small touches, refinements with legato, bow changes and slurred runs. They compliment each other nicely.


----------



## robibla (May 17, 2011)

I use the full version of LASS, the individual divisi control is nice.


----------



## Stephen Baysted (May 17, 2011)

vlado hudec @ Tue May 17 said:


> Rousseau @ Mon May 16 said:
> 
> 
> > >8o I best look into becoming a partner because some videos with my music on have 2, 3 and 6+ million views. Hmm.
> ...



LOL - artistically speaking, thankfully not. Financially speaking, unfortunately not :mrgreen:


----------



## tabulius (May 17, 2011)

What about divisi sections? You said that you have HS Diamond, so I would love to hear those in detail. There haven't been a much talk and demos about the A/B sections of HS. It would be nice to hear both divisis from each library. LASS however have a good demos so I think most of people have an idea of the sound.

Anyways thank you for these videos. These are really helping us out. o-[][]-o


----------



## 667 (May 24, 2011)

tabulius @ Tue May 17 said:


> What about divisi sections? You said that you have HS Diamond, so I would love to hear those in detail. There haven't been a much talk and demos about the A/B sections of HS. It would be nice to hear both divisis from each library. LASS however have a good demos so I think most of people have an idea of the sound.


The divisi mics in HS are mono. Initially I thought this meant they would not sound very good, but actually they work quite well in terms of creating a stereo image when used together, effectively replacing your "close" mics. You still need to use the stage or mid mics on both the divisi patches though, which means that you end up with for example 11 cellos on the divisi ("close") mics and 22 on the main mics.

From a purist point of view that's a disappointment but in practice it sounds ok. However it also means they become very resource hungry because you're running 4 concurrent mics (divisi A, Stage, Divisi B, Stage) even when playing in unison. 

What I'm most curious about, and have not tested yet, is how similar the Divisi A and B played together sounds to the standard Close mics. They are different mics to begin with but depending on how they are placed and recorded etc. it may be possible to switch between them. I wouldn't do so in the middle of a piece but I'd like to be able to do so between different pieces and not run huge divisi setups on all projects just because I need some cello chords in one section. 

I would say LASS's (ex: cello 3/3/4/1) divisi sections would therefore be superior in this regard (can't do 3 notes in HS section) and given its comparatively very low footprint for cpu/ram/disk i/o would certainly be my first choice when writing. (Similar conclusion to the OP in this case). But I am already starting to switch to HS for final export because I do prefer its sound, in most cases, for a variety of reasons. It's rare for me to really need three celli anyway; I'm happy to use Celli A/B and Violas A/B for these cases. There's also Violins I A and B, and Violins II A and B. And Basses A/B. Even if LASS technically does have more, that's still a lot of notes! 

I will post some demos later when I get the chance.


----------



## Hannes_F (May 24, 2011)

667 @ Tue May 24 said:


> The divisi mics in HS are mono. Initially I thought this meant they would not sound very good, but actually they work quite well in terms of creating a stereo image when used together, effectively replacing your "close" mics. You still need to use the stage or mid mics on both the divisi patches though, which means that you end up with for example 11 cellos on the divisi ("close") mics and 22 on the main mics.
> 
> From a purist point of view that's a disappointment



... but only as long as you don't really understand the mic technique. Real spot mics need to be mono. This is superior to stereo.


----------



## 667 (May 24, 2011)

Hannes_F @ Tue May 24 said:


> ... but only as long as you don't really understand the mic technique. Real spot mics need to be mono. This is superior to stereo.


Yes as per my initial comment: the Divisi mics work well, sound good, and provide good stereo image when combined. My point re "disappointment" was that when you use the stage / main / surround mics you are mixing in 2x the full sections: 



667 @ Tue May 24 said:


> You still need to use the stage or mid mics on both the divisi patches though, which means that you end up with for example 11 cellos on the divisi ("close") mics and *22 on the main mics*. From a purist point of view that's a disappointment


LASS of course does not have this problem.

Again, in practice this is not an really issue but for some purists it may be.


----------



## Hannes_F (May 24, 2011)

667 @ Wed May 25 said:


> Hannes_F @ Tue May 24 said:
> 
> 
> > ... but only as long as you don't really understand the mic technique. Real spot mics need to be mono. This is superior to stereo.
> ...



Ah I see, my bad. You mean you need to use the same set of stage / main / surround mics for each of the divisi patches since they are full sections, right?


----------



## 667 (May 24, 2011)

Yes, exactly:  the divisi mics are spot / mono and there is no exact corresponding divisi decca tree / stage / etc. mic for room/stage/image. So, you need to use the standard full section mics. In the docs EW claims that the sonic characteristics of a large vs very large section (eg 11 vs 22 players although actually since it's the same 11 players duplicated it's not quite same thing) is not significant, and that you can blend the full section mics with the divisi mics and it will still sound good. Having done some testing I agree that they have created an acceptable solution, to my ears anyway, but I wanted to acknowledge that for some the sound may not be correct-- especially if you are a LASS user who is used to the flexibility that its separately recorded sections offer. 

If you don't mind, can you elaborate why you say spot mics are better? To my mind, it should have been possible to create the divisi sections using 4 mics eg 1 pair section far-left, one section-left, one section-right, and one section far-right. Mixed to two stereo pairs. 

I'm not sure if this would have offered much benefit over current setup but when I heard HS had divisi I kind of expected something along these lines. 

Was there something specific about the mic technique you like or was it mostly sound-rejection you were referencing? (I am not mic technique expert).


----------



## tabulius (May 26, 2011)

Right. Thanks for the info. I learned a lot today about HS divisi  LASS obviously does the divisis very different than HS. Now I understand why East West didn't include the divisis in HS Gold, because those are close mics only.


----------

