# Is 8dio Strings Bundle the Holy Grail?



## Orchestrada (Jul 2, 2013)

Just curious.. Seems to me like the 'Strings Bundle' from 8dio has it all what strings are concerned. Is there anything I will be missing (except from libraries sounding slightly different) if I buy this package. If so: What?

o/~


----------



## jamwerks (Jul 3, 2013)

It is quite complete: 3 different group sizes, many different legato types, and a fantastic sound right out of the box!


----------



## Saxer (Jul 3, 2013)

no fast legatos... the name says it: adagio


----------



## midi_controller (Jul 3, 2013)

Ask anyone who owns it if it has become the only string library they use now and I would be shocked if anyone says yes. There has been plenty of discussion here on it's merits and it's shortcomings and I think the general consensus is that Adagio is great as an additional library to add to a solid base library like LASS, Cinematic Strings or Hollywood Strings. On it's own it just has too many things that it can't do, because it's approach is so specialized. Personally, I haven't gotten much use of it. It's got a really good sound (although I'm not a fan of the legatos to be honest), but it doesn't fit my workflow at all.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Jul 3, 2013)

IMO LASS is still the closest to a holy grail out there. Large sections, small section divisi, first chairs, sound sculptable with Stage and Color, impeccable programming with rock solid legatos, auto-arranger. Can sound silky or raw, epic or intimate etc etc.


----------



## jamwerks (Jul 3, 2013)

Yeah I don't have Lass, but when I see videos about auto-arranger, my mouth just starts to water. Something of the like for Adagio would be a big plus.

My only problem with Adagio is just that, the organization and workflow. I suggested that they split there patches into "individual brushes" (like Spitfire does), but they said they had no plans of doing that. I'm in the process of switching to Cubase for there "expression maps" so I can integrate Adagio (and the Hollywood stuff) more easily. 8dio was quite ambitious with the sound and articulations, without thinking much of the organization (imo).

I'd also agree on the fast legati for the moment, but there is a complete Vol II yet to come! For the price (about the same as the intro price of Sable complete), you get 3 ensembles, fantastic shorts, etc.

I wouldn't want to have just Adagio (or just HS, or just Sable), but it seems fairly complete. For my tastes, Lass is just too poor articulation-wise. Other than that, I'd probably buy-in.


----------



## Stiltzkin (Jul 3, 2013)

I find adagio more inspiring to play and get ideas sometimes, it's so nice being able to use the dynamic bowings and just sit and plonk away without having to ride any faders just to gsee what comes.

But I agree that it is not a complete library, there are a lot of things I wouldn't use adagio for - that's not to say it couldn't do it, I just don't think it would do it as well as other libraries (especially LASS).


----------



## tmm (Jul 3, 2013)

IMO it has the best tone of any of the libraries out there. I can't comment on the playability of the bundle as a whole, but I have the basses, and they play very well, and sound incredible. As for speed, I haven't had any trouble with them, but I'm not using them for 'basses do Caprice #1', either.


----------



## Ed (Jul 3, 2013)

Adagio isnt the holy grail, and if you go into it with that expectation you're probably going to be disappointed. There's some really cool stuff in it, and some unique creative ideas. Very very glad I have it, especially the basses of which the short notes are done VERY well (and the demos show this off)


----------



## Tanuj Tiku (Jul 3, 2013)

I am all for the hard work 8Dio has put into the strings but they are not for me and certainly not the holy grail.

I am a VSL lover and with the recent releases, I would put Spitfire and LASS way above Adagio. 

My dream string set up would be VSL, Spitfire and LASS. I think that would be the holy grail for now.

I just got the Embertone solo violin and its amazing. I can say with certainty that I have not yet heard anything quite like it and its a lot of fun to play with it. 

I think, they are going to come out with some great stuff. 

I like what Spitfire is doing lately. Some nice stuff, may be its motivating me to finally get another library that is not VSL. May pass on Dimension Strings.


Tanuj.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Jul 3, 2013)

The "holy grail" depends on how you define it.

1. Can do a good job on most of what you you would want to write because of the included articulations. 

Someone doing pop string arrangements or Mozart style will not necessarily need all that someone doing more modern classical music may need.

2. Has a "good" workflow.

Once again, as you see with the comments on Adagio here, one person's idea of a good workflow can be very different than others. 

Also, some people love key switches, others hate them. Some want a separate track for each articulation, others want to use many fewer.

3. Sounds good right out of the box.

For some people this is not important. They set up their templates with their verbs to where they like it and that is fine.

4. Does not require a lot of computer, RAM and disk power.

Once again, more important to some people than others.

5. Consistently in tune.

Once again, more important to some than others. Some others might even fine a nearly perfectly tuned library a drawback.

And on and on and on. My point is that the topic question is unanswerable because we do not all want the same things. So all we can do is state what we _personally_ want and which libraries achieve that best.


----------



## Resoded (Jul 3, 2013)

I wouldn't call it the holy grail, no. The instinct and village legatos are great, and the different spiccatos are even better. Though I find that there are lots of portions of the library that I don't use. Some of the legatos are a bit inconsistent at times. I'd say the biggest issue for me is that I don't like relying on fake reverbs. That's why Spitfire libraries are the holy grail for me. Also, I like strings that are recorded in position, and it frustrates me a bit having to simulate panning.


----------



## Orchestrada (Jul 3, 2013)

Well, seems like LASS would be a good place to start and then take it from there.. 

Thanks a lot for the input, guys! Good to get some help, being a technical newbie 

o-[][]-o


----------



## 667 (Jul 3, 2013)

I prefer Spitfire Audio's Sable to LASS, personally. It's the 'holy grail' for me.


----------



## midi_controller (Jul 3, 2013)

Orchestrada @ Wed Jul 03 said:


> Well, seems like LASS would be a good place to start and then take it from there..
> 
> Thanks a lot for the input, guys! Good to get some help, being a technical newbie
> 
> o-[][]-o



When it comes to choosing between any of the big string libraries (excluding Adagio since we have already talked about how it's a bit different from the other major players), use your ears to decide. LASS, Cinematic Strings, and Hollywood Strings will function in somewhat of a similar fashion so it really comes down to which speaks to you more and has a sound that you want.

There are a few caveats of course; LASS seems to be a hit or miss kind of library. I love the way it's set up, and I think it would be amazingly easy to work with, but I'm just not a fan of it's sound, and I'm not alone in that. Cinematic Strings is missing what I consider some pretty major articulations, such as spiccato. Hollywood Strings requires a bit more horsepower than any of the other libraries, and doesn't work very well on Macs.

Also consider mixing and matching. You can get, for example, Cinematic Strings for full sections, then add Spitfire's Sable and Solo Strings for smaller sections and solo. Sure, it will cost more than LASS on it's own, but it might ultimately be a better route if you are not into the sound of LASS.

For the sake of completeness, would someone who owns some VSL strings weigh in as well? I can't really speak too much about those since I'm not too into dry libraries, but they are definitely a contender here.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Jul 3, 2013)

667 @ Wed Jul 03 said:


> I prefer Spitfire Audio's Sable to LASS, personally. It's the 'holy grail' for me.



As Jay says, what you define as the holy grail is pretty variable. I guess I took it to mean "does everything", and LASS easily has the best shot of fulfilling that as it has integrated first chairs, divisi (also good for chamber sizes) and full section. You don't "need" anything else, with the proviso that some of the more esoteric articulations aren't there. With Sable you only get small sections (with some emulated larger ones), and no singles. Adagio does have singles, small and large, but its more esoteric approach is clearly not to all tastes (and it's not true divsi).

Of course, Sable has a MUCH broader articulation list, but you'd still need singles and really a larger ensemble from elsewhere. So for my definition at least, it's not the holy grail - yet!


----------



## Casiquire (Jul 3, 2013)

midi_controller @ Wed 03 Jul said:


> There are a few caveats of course; LASS seems to be a hit or miss kind of library. I love the way it's set up, and I think it would be amazingly easy to work with, but I'm just not a fan of it's sound, and I'm not alone in that.



Ever since the introduction of Stage and Color, people are changing their minds about that!


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Jul 3, 2013)

Once again,you guys are proving my point. Everyone has a different idea of "the holy grail".

As I trust you all know me well enough by now to know I do not write what I do not believe, if I could only own one, it would be Hollywood Strings.


----------



## asilagy (Jul 3, 2013)

These are my thoughts on 8dio. Before I begin let me preface this by saying every library is different and whether one is better than another is subjective to a degree and relative to your individual needs and workflow. My opinions are not absolutes.



8dio Adagio represents an evolution in thinking about sampled strings.

When an real string ensemble plays music the legato is variable based on the character of the music. 8dio has chosen to produce different legato types for different styles of playing to help us cope with this. For example a Legato could be very loose slow portamento with expressive vibrato, or a patch could be a very tight clean fast legato with little pitch wavering and round robin legato. Within those, patches are key-switches for various lengths and arcs of the bowing. LASS originally had the option of choosing between legato, portamento, and glissando, and varying the speed on all three. LASS's approach at the time really seemed like the floodgates had been opened but now seems to more of a clinical solution offering technical options, albeit still valid and functional. Adagio's choices seems more like an visceral solution producin emotional options.


My favorite part of Adagio is the Dynamic Bowing. Let me preface why... I started off about 10 years ago with stock sounds in my DAW, then I got a very nice soundfont collection and I finally had many orchestral to split out parts. I bought gigastudio and I now had better quality recordings of instruments that sounded more characteristic of idiomatic to each instrument, I bought VSL Horizon I now had real legato transitions and more articulations, near-perfect tuning, anechoic space to shape my room. Then i got LASS, which was edgier more humanistic, and gave me variable legato and divisi, not to mention some of the most useful spicattos around! A couple other libraries later Adagio opens up new pathways to applying a greater degree of humanism to my music. My point being each time a new innovation comes out it makes me a better composer/producer/orchestrator because I can work in greater detail than before.

Making your parts swell like a real ensemble, previously was done with Modwheel, crossfading through a mix of different dynamics and volume to round out the difference. This is a good approximation but not the same as players literally going from pp-mf-pp. Adagio has recorded tons of dynamic bowing including different dynamics, lengths, bow changes in between etc... This seems to give my string pads so much more character expression and life.


Adagio is recorded with 2 mics in a space I find to be easy to work with. Not as much control over the space as Spitfire but none the less out of the box quite nice.

Heres a few issues I have with adagio.. It definitely has tuning issues! At some points its detrimental to my work but usually not a problem. There are other more "clinical" sounding libraries out there where tuning is perfect so I don't care, but nonetheless it is noticeable. It can be beautiful in its imperfection and sometimes just blatently off and distracting. It could be the unexplained reason why a cue is rejected because something just doesn't feel right.

Looking at each Adagio release I've seen an evolution in their process, which is good and bad. Rather than stick to one thing they agreed upon in the beginning I can they've explored different techniques and articulations as they went on. In the end you end up with more some really cool sounds on the later releases. But as a result there is an absolute continuity issue, going from patch to patch particularly in the Dynamic Bowings, which would benefit from a great deal from continuity in the key switches, for under pressure composers.

I've assisted a handful of established guys and in showing some Adagio I've found that they were instantly turned off because their first pass on the keyboard isn't exactly what they want. This is a detail oriented library, It requires you to think a little differently and work with the library in a way unlike other libraries. When playing legato parts Im often thinking more like a violinist in the ensemble listening to the ensemble for the right moment to go to the next note, other libraries I would simply select the articulation, play keyboard, and the string part would be an approximation of what I played on keyboard, and with a bit of cc and midi editing thats, that. Adagio on the other hand, requires a little more thought with the keyswitches especially in the legato because some of the articulation die out without a sustain loop (unless you use their susXfade patch). This is because different articualtions have different arcs, speeds, and types of expression. I find my self key switching more note-for-note to make my parts come alive. This library requires more effort than others but the results of putting the effort into the detail makes a huge difference. 

If you are the composer that wants the fastest way to get the job done this is probably not for you. If you want to take the time to make your parts breath and come alive with greater, this library will be a fantastic addition to your library..

FYI, I built a pretty slick logic template for resolving the continuity issues of the library.


----------



## jamwerks (Jul 3, 2013)

EastWest Lurker @ Wed Jul 03 said:


> if I could only own one, it would be Hollywood Strings.



Thanks Mr. EW for letting us know your favorite string library is from EW.


----------



## mark812 (Jul 3, 2013)

jamwerks @ Wed Jul 03 said:


> EastWest Lurker @ Wed Jul 03 said:
> 
> 
> > if I could only own one, it would be Hollywood Strings.
> ...



:lol:


----------



## jamwerks (Jul 3, 2013)

asilagy @ Wed Jul 03 said:


> If you are the composer that wants the fastest way to get the job done this is probably not for you. If you want to take the time to make your parts breath and come alive with greater, this library will be a fantastic addition to your library..



Pretty much my thoughts also....


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Jul 3, 2013)

jamwerks @ Wed Jul 03 said:


> EastWest Lurker @ Wed Jul 03 said:
> 
> 
> > if I could only own one, it would be Hollywood Strings.
> ...



Hell, I built a PC to run it I like it so much. 

But I am also the guy who has written that in terms of sound, my favorite woodwind library, the one I still go to most, even though it lacks true legato, is the old Sonic Implants library.

So put that in your pipe and smoke it


----------



## 667 (Jul 3, 2013)

EastWest Lurker @ Wed Jul 03 said:


> Once again,you guys are proving my point. Everyone has a different idea of "the holy grail".


Yes, absolutely. For me it is Sable because it is the best-sounding. Which is subjective, of course. It is also the most playable out-of-the-box. (Again, subjectively so). Albion II is my second favourite. So clearly I prefer the small section sound. Someone who wants big sounds is going to prefer HS, or CS2, or possibly VSL Apassionista.

I think LASS is still best for divisi writing (as stated in the LASS thread) and HS is best for the "Hollywood" sound (as stated in the HS thread).  I do use those libraries as well. But my default template these days is Spitfire Spitfire Spitfire.


----------



## Scrianinoff (Jul 3, 2013)

HS is not only limited to 'Hollywood sound', it can do Wagner and late Russian Romantics very well too. One of the things I love most about this library is how incredibly beautiful its ppp layer is, those Violas in ppp, incredibly soft and yet defined and low on noise (the mid mics are the noisiest but still ok though, use close and surround, ymmv. Oh and its playable runs sound very good to me, why doesn't anybody mention those anymore?

Adagio excels at convincingly expressing melody lines that need a certain type of legato playing. It has a lot of different good legato types that you cannot find anywhere else. It can do fast legato too, if you mix in divisi and solo too, separately played in though and choose the legato and CCs carefully. 

LASS is the only library with real divisi, that is, its three divisi are different players with different instruments, and a real first chair that doesn't sound like a solo violinist, which in practice means that it blends in extremely well with the divisi. In other words, it doesn't sound like Maxim Vengerov has joined your violin section.

OSR's runs sound the best, most convincing to me. Don't forget its beautiful ppp layer, with the so needed soft onset. Quite some articulations too, no legato however, overlapping its sustains might fool quite some people though.

Spitfire's non-bespoke string range excels in natural, musically results with little effort. Probably I'm not yet skilled enough in using it, especially with Sable still under construction, but bending it into something it's not meant to be leads to horrible results, in my hands that is. Spitfire libs are my favourite sketch pad, and most of those sketches survive the final mix. It just sounds so convincingly natural, beautiful, musical, but I already said that.

I don't have CS, no comments.

VSL, well, I never got any wonderful results out of it. Guy Bacos and Amit Poznansky, to name just two wizards, are the living proof VSL strings can sound wonderful though.


----------



## jamwerks (Jul 3, 2013)

EastWest Lurker @ Wed Jul 03 said:


> in terms of sound, my favorite woodwind library, the one I still go to most, even though it lacks true legato, is the old Sonic Implants library.
> 
> So put that in your pipe and smoke it



So you present yourself as an totally normal forum member, whose opinions are totally un biased towards your employer?

What platform is the most user-customizable and resource-friendly, Kontakt or Play?

In terms of "sound" what is better, Spitfire horns or EW Hollywood horns?


----------



## MarkS_Comp (Jul 3, 2013)

jamwerks @ Wed Jul 03 said:


> In terms of "sound" what is better, Spitfire horns or EW Hollywood horns?



IMHO, EW Hollywood Brass Diamond is better in terms of sound quality than Sable's horns. Assuming, you add a good verb to HBD. Not way better, but somewhat.


----------



## midi_controller (Jul 3, 2013)

EastWest Lurker @ Wed Jul 03 said:


> jamwerks @ Wed Jul 03 said:
> 
> 
> > EastWest Lurker @ Wed Jul 03 said:
> ...



I'll agree with Jay, and I don't work for nor do I particularly like East West at all, at least as a business. Even though EW has pretty much abandoned them, even though I have to use TransMIDIfier to work around how incredibly limited Play is, and even though there are issues with the programming, Hollywood Strings is still the backbone of my string template. Besides, they are dirt cheap now.

To comment on what asilagy said about Adagio, I feel like Adagio was kind of an experiment. It doesn't really seem like a professional library, mainly because of the huge inconsistencies and the lack of anything even resembling a "core" patches like you would find in just about any other library since... I don't know, the last 10 years? Everything is built for a specific purpose, and there is just too little space to expand beyond what the patch was intended to imitate. One of the biggest disappointments to me was that while you have a bit of control of how a line ends with the legato patches, you have NO control of how it begins, which is, in my opinion, WAY more important.

As I said before, it's the workflow which all but kills the library for me. Adagio requires you to write for Adagio, not for strings. It just takes forever to work with it if you don't write specifically for what it can do, and there needs to be a limit on how long it takes to program in your libraries. If I have to, through the course of writing a single string part, switch between 3 different legato patches, which may have completely different key switches, a dynamic bowings patch, which WILL have completely different key switches, and a sustain patch, which also will have different key switches, and then have to manually cross-fade them into each other using volume CCs, that is insane. Sure, it might sound good when it's done, but is it worth that little bit more extra realism? Is it worth taking twice as long to do what you could do in any other library, especially when you consider that you could be writing another piece of music?


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Jul 3, 2013)

jamwerks @ Wed Jul 03 said:


> EastWest Lurker @ Wed Jul 03 said:
> 
> 
> > in terms of sound, my favorite woodwind library, the one I still go to most, even though it lacks true legato, is the old Sonic Implants library.
> ...



Kontakt,but Play is usable, will get better and may be a better sounding engine, as is also true of the EXS 24 IMHO.
,
Tough call as that Spitfire venue is gorgeous but you are married to it where HB also sounds really good but gives you more control. And of course it is much more complete.


----------



## Blakus (Jul 3, 2013)

When used in the right contexts, Adagio is pretty powerful - but it definitely can't do everything. Here's a LASS vs Adagio comparison I did for my own curiosity a while ago. LASS overall is much more flexible, but for this style of playing, adagio just breathes *so* much more life. Sonically it sounds brilliant too. I'm not sure any string library is the mother of all yet, but a combination of a few different libraries seems to the current "holy grail".

[mp3]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3363455/LASSvsADAGIO.mp3[/mp3]
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3363455/LASSvsADAGIO.mp3 (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/336 ... ADAGIO.mp3)


----------



## jamwerks (Jul 3, 2013)

EastWest Lurker @ Wed Jul 03 said:


> Kontakt,but Play is usable, will get better and may be a better sounding engine, as is also true of the EXS 24 IMHO.
> ,
> Tough call as that Spitfire venue is gorgeous but you are married to it where HB also sounds really good but gives you more control. And of course it is much more complete.



It's clear, and these two statements go in the same direction, that you'll always try in some way to defend, or show the strong side of your employer. Fine, but why enter into discussions seeming taking a neutral stance?

Does anyone from Spitfire, 8dio, Cinesamples, or other, in this forum, do as you do?


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Jul 3, 2013)

jamwerks @ Wed Jul 03 said:


> EastWest Lurker @ Wed Jul 03 said:
> 
> 
> > Kontakt,but Play is usable, will get better and may be a better sounding engine, as is also true of the EXS 24 IMHO.
> ...



I say what I believe to be true, no more, no less. I wear two hats here, one as EW's Online Coordinator a part time position, and one as a composer who uses sample based instruments. Oh, and yes there are a couple of VSL guys here who also are somewhat in a similar position here. 

People know who I work for. Those who have enough experience with me here know that if I say I like a product, whether it is EW's, Embertone's, ArtVista, Sampletekk, Sonic Implants, Project Sam's etc. that I like the product, I even write reviews ofnon-EW products. If there is an EW product I do not care for, I obviously am not going to come here and start proclaiming it because I would be fired but I also do not come here and routinely praise every single EW product. Nor do not see me come here and automatically dismiss non-EW products, do you?

If you don't like that I wear the two hats and think I should limit myself to one or the other, you are entitled to think that but it is not going to deter me from doing my job AND talking about libraries I like, EW or not EW.


----------



## KingIdiot (Jul 3, 2013)

The only holy grail is the real thing (with good players)

once you remove the need for your *insert multisampled instrument here instrument to be the end all end all, you'll only look to make music and find the library that will support your need/want. Be it articulation, or tonality.

if you're looking for a string library that will do it all, you need to stop looking at libraries.

In the end, if you have a set, and you're not getting what you want out of it. It's possible you... chose poorly.

More than likely if you bought a library to cater to a specific needs, instead of looking for some high bar that is perpetually and infinitely raised, you probably... chose wisely.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Jul 3, 2013)

KingIdiot @ Wed Jul 03 said:


> The only holy grain is the real thing (with good players)
> 
> once you remove the need for your *insert multisampled instrument here instrument to be the end all end all, you'll only look to make music and find the library that will support your need/want. Be it articulation, or tonality.
> 
> ...



I think this is a very wise post, King.


----------



## MichalCielecki (Jul 4, 2013)

midi_controller @ 7/3/2013 said:


> Ask anyone who owns it if it has become the only string library they use now and I would be shocked if anyone says yes.



Yes.


----------



## Vlzmusic (Jul 4, 2013)

There are lots of ways to do it right - but fewer to do it wisely. 
In my view, VSL team is the one who proved being very effective in the past few years - software programming, libraries design, competitive R&D and quality assurance, all of these contribute to the new product line versatility.


----------



## AR (Jul 4, 2013)

NOpe it's not the holy grail. It's good for as-the-name-says Adagio passages.

To recieve a pretty convincing String sound you gotta get probably every String library out there. Then you have to write like min. 10 demos with every Library to just learn and understand how it responds. 

Nobody here will share their holy secret to their unique sound, cause everyone is afraid to loose the next scoring gig to someone else. 

But so much for Adagio: Adagio has 3 mix positions: Close/Stage/Combined

Nobody would use only the Close mics and putting an artifical reverb on it. The Stage mics sound too thin. So, you need a stereo widener. But that doesn't convince me. The Combined is pretty much the go-for (also as default when loaded a patch), but it works only to recieve that In-Your-Face sound. So, if your writing a horn solo passage, the strings are too close and tend too sound too much upfront. Can you follow me?

Adagio worked fine for me, when I did a only String+Piano Score.

Greets
AR


----------



## renegade (Jul 4, 2013)

Blakus @ Wed 03 Jul said:


> When used in the right contexts, Adagio is pretty powerful - but it definitely can't do everything. Here's a LASS vs Adagio comparison I did for my own curiosity a while ago. LASS overall is much more flexible, but for this style of playing, adagio just breathes *so* much more life. Sonically it sounds brilliant too. I'm not sure any string library is the mother of all yet, but a combination of a few different libraries seems to the current "holy grail".
> 
> [mp3]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3363455/LASSvsADAGIO.mp3[/mp3]
> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3363455/LASSvsADAGIO.mp3 (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/336 ... ADAGIO.mp3)



Interesting example!..and what a huge difference! Adagio really shines in this example

Is this LASS out of the box w color/stage?


----------



## midi_controller (Jul 4, 2013)

MichalCielecki @ Wed Jul 03 said:


> Yes.



Seriously? You have completely stopped using every other string library you have except for Adagio? Well I'm shocked, that takes some serious dedication! I just have no idea why anyone would do that...


----------



## Casiquire (Jul 4, 2013)

I have a feeling he's just playing Devil's Advocate...


----------



## Graham Keitch (Jul 4, 2013)

Adagio doesn't have a true second violin section so it can't possibly be the Holy Grail - yet.

I loaded up the solo violin along side Embertone, Paginini and Spitfire SS. The 8dio instrument sounds synthy and thin by comparison - and I detect the same steely quality in the rest of the library. It's not for me but clearly others love it.

You also need to consider whether you want to build an entire orchestra with all instruments sharing the same acoustic space as per Spitfire, Cinesamples and others. 8dio strings were recorded in a church but the recently announced woods are being recorded in a symphony hall. This seems a muddled approach to me - although not necessarily wrong. Again, it's just not my choice.


----------



## givemenoughrope (Jul 4, 2013)

IMO the holy grail string library is all of them with eq and verb. My opinion might change if I jump into Sable. Still, none of them can do it all. 

Adagio is a bit steely, LASS (pre v2) a bit harsh...use eq.


----------



## MichalCielecki (Jul 5, 2013)

midi_controller @ 7/4/2013 said:


> Seriously? You have completely stopped using every other string library you have except for Adagio? Well I'm shocked, that takes some serious dedication! I just have no idea why anyone would do that...



Probably because you think that your approach is the right one. Everyone that has different taste and way of work is just an idiot, right?

I used Adagio for the strings parts only for a couple of months now in my projects. For what I needed, Adagio did great and I didn't need to layer anything. But since I'm a percussion graduate, I probably don't have as good ears as yours. I should consult my template and/or compositions with you first. :lol:


----------



## Daryl (Jul 5, 2013)

I use VSL for all my Strings. It allows me to write pretty much anything that I want to (apart from using certain extended effects that none of the libraries have).

When something better comes along, I'll use that instead. So far there hasn't been anything better, IMO. However, I don't need to tack lots of different mini performances together to make my music sound expressive, and I'm not shy about moving multiple controllers, so YMMV.

D


----------



## jamwerks (Jul 5, 2013)

Daryl @ Fri Jul 05 said:


> When something better comes along, I'll use that instead. So far there hasn't been anything better, IMO.



WOW, VSL strings are on par or better than Adagio & Sable? Better in sound, better in control, better in wealth of articulations, what are the decisive point for you?


----------



## Daryl (Jul 5, 2013)

jamwerks @ Fri Jul 05 said:


> Daryl @ Fri Jul 05 said:
> 
> 
> > When something better comes along, I'll use that instead. So far there hasn't been anything better, IMO.
> ...


For me, yes to all your questions.

1) They sound better.
2) They are more even, especially with the legato patches, which makes creating a performance more successful
3) If I want to layer them with live players, there is no problem matching acoustics
4) Allowing reverb to create most of the tail means that I don't get that unnatural sound that occurs with ambient libraries when you do a volume change and the whole room sound (including noise floor) disappears.
5) I'm able to create as much detail as I like, without it sounding thick and synth-like
7) I have the flexibility to make it sound small or large.
8) I can put the players wherever I like in the room. There is no problem.
9) It is pretty light on resources, so I don't need any sample slaves, yet can still work at a buffer of 128.
5) The VI Pro player is fantastic and very flexible, so that I'm able to work quickly, efficiently and get the results that I want.

D


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Jul 5, 2013)

Daryl has said this many times and Daryl is a fine composer.

If he changed "_)1 They sound better._" to _)1 After I add my processing and cc manipulation, they sound better."_ I would have no objective problem with what he wrote, though I may disagree subjectively.. 

But I would bet you the farm, if we brought 100 good musicians to his studio and with no processing or cc additions, play the same line in any version of VSL strings and then do the same with Hollywood Strings, app. 90 of them will disagree with that statement as written.


----------



## Daryl (Jul 5, 2013)

EastWest Lurker @ Fri Jul 05 said:


> If he changed "_)1 They sound better._" to _)1 After I add my processing and cc manipulation, they sound better."_ I would have no objective problem with what he wrote, though I may disagree subjectively..
> 
> But I would bet you the farm, if we brought 100 good musicians to his studio and with no processing or cc additions, play the same line in any version of VSL strings and then do the same with Hollywood Strings, app. 90 of them will disagree with that statement as written.


Jay, for a performer such as myself, playing in a line without any CC manipulation would make no musical sense, so you would be comparing one unmusical line with another unmusical line. I also think that it would really depend on the sort of music you were playing.

D


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Jul 5, 2013)

Of course but the word you used was "sound." 

That said, even if we both did it in real time with cc, I still stand by my prediction that I will be walking away with a large chunk of your money if no reverb is added.

Put it in MIR Pro and now we have a real discussion


----------



## Daryl (Jul 5, 2013)

EastWest Lurker @ Fri Jul 05 said:


> That said, even if we both did it in real time with cc, I still stand by my prediction that I will be walking away with a large chunk of your money if no reverb is added.


Nobody walks away with a large chunk of my money, other than those damn expensive session players. :twisted: 

D


----------



## jamwerks (Jul 5, 2013)

Hey Daryl, if I may say so, I translate your answer above as saying that you're just too busy writing and producing to worry about new string libraries. Especially if you're just doing demos with the samples, prior to recording with an orchestra.

I know a lot of people still using VSL or EW symphonic stuff, just because they know them, and because they're just delivering pre-recording "demos".

Have you really heard Adagios shots for viola & double bass? They send a shiver down my spine...


----------



## Casiquire (Jul 5, 2013)

Jamwerks, VSL really can't be compared with the old EWQL Symphonic Orchestra. VSL is on par with Hollywood Strings. Just because it came out ten years ago doesn't mean it's outdated, because it's not in the slightest, especially if used as intended with MIR. I'm going to be politically correct for Jay and state that VSL+MIR+bit of EQ=the most flexible orchestra sound with the most usable articulation set out there, and the articulations are still competitive with new libraries coming out. Then Dimension Strings and Dimension Brass came in, and nobody can compete with that.

Jay's point is that Hollywood Strings sounds finished out of the box where VSL's allow more room for EQ to personal taste. This is a valid point and it all depends on workflow--I'd rather EQ my strings to sound like "me".


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Jul 5, 2013)

Well I would hope you would do so not out of political correctness but out of trying to be intellectually honest, as I always strive to be.

As for EQing to "sound like me" I guess the proof is in the pudding, no?


----------



## Guy Rowland (Jul 5, 2013)

EastWest Lurker @ Fri Jul 05 said:


> Of course but the word you used was "sound."
> 
> That said, even if we both did it in real time with cc, I still stand by my prediction that I will be walking away with a large chunk of your money if no reverb is added.
> 
> Put it in MIR Pro and now we have a real discussion



I know this is potentially pedant's corner, but it's a bit of a pointless argument imo. VSL is ALWAYS supposed to be used with reverb / eq etc by design, so comparing with a library that is designed to sound good out of the box isn't really of much value. The cliched words "apples" and "oranges" spring to mind.

As the years go by, although I do love several of my ambient libraries and you'd have to prise them out of my cold dead hand, I do think I prefer the drier approach in general, just cos legato is always better. I think VSL's big mistake (if it is a mistake at all) was not to bundle a good er / tail reverb in with the basic player from the beginning, along with some standard presets. All the business about VSL being difficult is a bit overblown I think... MIR is very sophisticated clever and expensive, but one decent ER and one decent tail and a pan knob will get you 90% of the way there imo.

LASS is still the benchmark for me - still has the character of a scoring stage but without the tail to screw up the transitions. Can't wait for LASB, but I know I'll have to...


----------



## KMuzzey (Jul 5, 2013)

Just FYI for anyone who doesn't have the Adagio strings: each module also has an extensive set of short articulations, including multiple types of spiccatos (spicc on bow, feathered spicc, up/down spic) -- Troels did a video on the 8Dio YouTube page showing off the short articulations and it's pretty spectacular-sounding. Check it out. It might be "adagio" but the short artics patch is brilliant.

Kerry


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Jul 5, 2013)

2 points:

1. Hollywood Strings, especially the close mics, are pretty dry.

2. Without assigning a qualitative judgement, putting a sound into a room/hall/studio IR still will sound quite different from the sound of a library recorded with the properties of that venue.


----------



## Daryl (Jul 5, 2013)

jamwerks @ Fri Jul 05 said:


> Hey Daryl, if I may say so, I translate your answer above as saying that you're just too busy writing and producing to worry about new string libraries. Especially if you're just doing demos with the samples, prior to recording with an orchestra.
> 
> I know a lot of people still using VSL or EW symphonic stuff, just because they know them, and because they're just delivering pre-recording "demos".
> 
> Have you really heard Adagios shots for viola & double bass? They send a shiver down my spine...


You do realise how patronising you sound, don't you? It may be a language thing but I think you are being quite insulting. You may have no respect for my ears, but I do know a lot about String playing, so my opinions are not based on nothing. I can categorically state that even if I wasn't using live players at all, there is no way I would change my choice of libraries. Make of that whatever you like, I'm done with you. :roll: 

D


----------



## Guy Rowland (Jul 5, 2013)

EastWest Lurker @ Fri Jul 05 said:


> 2 points:
> 
> 1 Hollywood Strings, especially the close mics, are pretty dry.
> 
> 2. Without assigning a qualitative judgement, putting a sound into a room/hall/studio IR still will sound quite different from the sound of a library recorded with the properties of that venue.



1 - yes, HS is more similar to LASS, but it's very different to the super-dry VSL. LASS can be used out of the box too for a certain kind of sound. VSL can't really, so my point still stands.

2 - agreed to a point, but I'm coming round to the view that this has led sampling up a bit of a blind alley. It's true that some instruments seem to need the room more than others. But in general like I said, I think a good ER, tail and EQ will get you an awful lot of the way there, and it's my view that it's debatable whether or not the remaining sonic difference between real stage and fake outweighs the disadvantages that come with the real stage if it is an ambient space. OK, your shorts may sound gorgeous, but if the legato is a mess and you can't play anything above a moderate speed... what's the point? Both HS and LASS don't suffer this problem, that's why I said I think LASS is the dream ticket in some ways. If Play 4 sorts out background loading and streaming on the fly, I may yet get converted to HS!

For me, the next generation of libraries I'll be excited about will not be ambient I think. Ideally LASS / HS size is probably best, but if VSL et al make fake space really easy and sonically strong, I could be swayed there.


----------



## Gusfmm (Jul 5, 2013)

Guy- the next generation is already here. It is called Dimension Strings.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Jul 5, 2013)

Gusfmm @ Fri Jul 05 said:


> Guy- the next generation is already here. It is called Dimension Strings.



I should look into it more - it's complexity kinda put me off a bit though, plus the fact that I'm all stringed out for now.


----------



## Arbee (Jul 5, 2013)

It's amusing the lengths folk will go to in trying to dismiss other's views - "I disagree therefore you must be deficient, dated, or in denial".  I'm with Daryl, VSL works best for me and has the quality software to match, whichever way you try to spin it. :D It obviously doesn't work for everyone, and there are other good alternatives that will work better based on taste, knowledge, playing skills etc. - just be happy you've found what works best for you.

.


----------



## midi_controller (Jul 5, 2013)

MichalCielecki @ Thu Jul 04 said:


> Probably because you think that your approach is the right one. Everyone that has different taste and way of work is just an idiot, right?
> 
> I used Adagio for the strings parts only for a couple of months now in my projects. For what I needed, Adagio did great and I didn't need to layer anything. But since I'm a percussion graduate, I probably don't have as good ears as yours. I should consult my template and/or compositions with you first. :lol:



I don't know why you are getting so upset, I didn't insult you or insinuate that anyone's particular workflow is wrong, and I'm sorry if you took it that way. I do think you missed an important part of my post:



> It just takes forever to work with it *if you don't write specifically for what it can do...*



If you write FOR Adagio, it's not that hard to work with. Hell, I could sit around and use those dynamic bowings patches to write stuff all day, but that isn't really want I want to do. I don't like being forced to write for a library, that is all.

The question posed was if Adagio was the "Holy Grail", if it can do everything, and it can't. That isn't an opinion, it just can't. As an example, if you sit down with pen and paper, and write out a little piece for strings, then take it over to Adagio, you are going to be in a world of hurt. Most other string libraries will at least let you approximate it, Adagio just wasn't built that way.


----------



## EforEclectic (Jul 5, 2013)

Adagio is really good at certain things, no question. Is it the best be-all-end-all solution? I don't think so. Very good? Absolutely. I would say the same thing of Sable, Hollywood Strings, and LASS. 

Don't make me choose just one.


----------



## Peter Alexander (Jul 5, 2013)

Daryl @ Fri Jul 05 said:


> jamwerks @ Fri Jul 05 said:
> 
> 
> > Daryl @ Fri Jul 05 said:
> ...



To this list I would add:

11. All recorded in the same room with the same RT60 so there's utter consistency.
12. Learn the player once and you've learned how to work the rest of the libraries.
13. For me, I start by adding early reflections (FORTI/SERTI) before reverb.
14. Many EW libs recorded in EW Studio 1 (especially percussion) blend more easily with VSL since the RT60 of both rooms is the same.
15. String/wood/brass combinations shown in Professional Orchestration 2A-2B easy to set up in the Vienna Instrument player so they're right at hand.
16. Use of internal Power Pan makes spatial placement stage left to right a breeze thus ending the discussion that VSL is hard to mix with;
17. Spatial placement with VSS is a snap if you'd rather use that, just pull ER slider down to 0 for VSL.
18. Because of the Silent Stage's low RT60, easier to get Sample Modeling brass to fit in and position.

In response to another post, when you're writing for a living, working with a smaller subset of libraries is a good business decision because once you know them you know them and your production/mixing time is sped up. 

For a devil's advocate position, see my article on Sonic Control.tv on building a template based on Kontakt libs only. 

With the new Complete Composers Collection, you can build a pretty stunning template with the Hollywood series only.

It's always about:

1. what are you writing?
2. what sound do you want?

Lots of options. Just understand that the answer is personal to each writer based on their approach to writing, producing, and mixing.


----------



## Resoded (Jul 5, 2013)

I'm curious, those of you who use VSL, do you have any audio demos of your work somewhere?


----------



## Peter Alexander (Jul 5, 2013)

@Guy - I hear you about VSL, but it's only been in the past year that I relooked at things. Your point about ER is dead on. Not being an engineer, nor wanting to be one, I've really latched on to FORTI/SERTI with the Vienna Suite because it gives me LOTS of ER options to test with by room size. So if I want the ensemble in an Abbey Road size Studio 1, I have lots of options to get me there. 

If I want a more "Smecky" sound to which I'd add a Lexicon on the mains (I have a PCM 90 I picked up from eBay), I can do that, too. The secret with VSL, as you've noted, are getting the ERs happening.


----------



## KingIdiot (Jul 6, 2013)

Over a decade later and the same question pops up and it's the same answer. Then discussion devolves into anyone's opinion is not mine doesn't know what they're doing.

These are tools. You can use a screwdriver to hammer in a nail, but a hammer is gonna probably do it better. Budget accordingly. Look for sales. Learn to use the tools to their best, otherwise you'll end up with people laughing at your bent nails and smashed fingers.

Seriously folk, it's really up to the individual and their priorities. Getting some sort of consensus on a broad, subjective question is just a popularity contest based on the most vocal of folk.

Sometimes it's about tonality, sometimes flexibility, sometimes expression, playback engine, price... blah blah whatever.

I know I sound a bit condescending. I apologize.

It's just that I can't understand the chase for the perfect library anymore. I've been involved in it long enough now to know that it's a futile mission. Needs change, wants change, and you need to multiply that effect by every user. Chasing trying to create that will be and endless process. Some of those processes undermining the original approach/process possibly. The search for it by users really does away with even trying to understand the original library's creator's vision.

Every time I hear someone throw a stratocaster with a single coil through massive gain and try to pass it off as a thick guitar sound I'm gonna shake my head and groan, but for some broke garage bands, I totally understand why. Get the tools you need to get the job done right, if that matters enough to you, or cheat with what you have, because it's all you have.

In the end. Make music. Get it out. I promise you, every one of these libraries can create expressive and moving pieces of music. Your problem isn't the libraries if you can't, and it might be time to delve into the other parts of midi-mockup-ing instead of just your wallet.


----------



## Peter Alexander (Jul 6, 2013)

Well said!


----------



## Vlzmusic (Jul 6, 2013)

Resoded @ Fri Jul 05 said:


> I'm curious, those of you who use VSL, do you have any audio demos of your work somewhere?




Haven`t got any nice and polished stuff which consists of mostly VSL, but here are two raw ones (but based on pre-made template of course) done for some pitching purposes, and they are 100% Vsl (and MIR)

https://www.dropbox.com/s/o1y2wmt254cise4/Strauss_upd.mp3 (https://www.dropbox.com/s/o1y2wmt254cis ... ss_upd.mp3)

http://vlzmusic.bandcamp.com/track/airship-theme-vg


----------



## TSU (Jul 6, 2013)

KingIdiot, good point! Agree with you. But not all can have all libraries. And people try to spend their money wise. And secondly, this is natural aspiration to have a one magical library that can do everything. This is very hard to use many different libraries with unique sound, interface, dynamics and workflow.

People share their subjective opinions and experience with those who don't have enough of it for make decision or just need alternative view point or just looking information about libraries they don't have. Forum by nature the place where all speaks for themselfs I think.

Maybe we all together should write an article with maximum objective information about librairies.
And it will be very useful for them who need information to make a subjective decision.
But this is very difficult to do that way, that would be all agree.

I deeply understand what are you want to say. And sometimes feel same things...
We all musicians. And do this not for learn libraries of course. This is necessity for us who can't record live (and even who can too in many cases). Because all of us want do their best. And take the maximum from the instruments we have on a way to a live recordings. And all this is quiet normal in my opinion. People will be talk forever. And this is good)

Those who want write - will write anyway. Even on a single string on the wood stick.
But we all have so many options... and many of us can't have it all. So we need the right decision. To do the maximum we can do. It seems I already sad that before))

Sorry for my english. Without sleep about 24 hours...


----------



## jamwerks (Jul 6, 2013)

Daryl @ Fri Jul 05 said:


> You do realise how patronising you sound, don't you? It may be a language thing but I think you are being quite insulting.



No insult or patronizing intended, just talking samples. Out of your 10 points, only one refered to the "sound" witch is the most important to me. I too love their sampler, and work-flow, but am not satisfied any more by the results.

I wonder how many people who still prefer VSL actually has other libraries, or if they just hesitate to buy, being happy with what they have. After all the music is more important than the samples.

I have pretty much everything of VSL, but since buying Sable, Adagio, HS, HB, HOW, CB, CWW, etc. I've taken VSL out of my template. To me the downside by VSL is their Silent Stage recording room. But when they decided to build it about 15 years ago, it probably seemed like the best room for sampling.


----------



## MichalCielecki (Jul 6, 2013)

midi_controller @ 7/6/2013 said:


> I don't know why you are getting so upset, I didn't insult you or insinuate that anyone's particular workflow is wrong, and I'm sorry if you took it that way.



You stated you don't find Adagio fitting in your workflow at all, then your response to my statement about using only Adagio for the strings parts was "I just have no idea why anyone would do that...", so you think how does that look? :wink:


----------



## midi_controller (Jul 6, 2013)

MichalCielecki @ Sat Jul 06 said:


> You stated you don't find Adagio fitting in your workflow at all, then your response to my statement about using only Adagio for the strings parts was "I just have no idea why anyone would do that...", so you think how does that look? :wink:



Ah, ok, that came out wrong. I should have said "I just have no idea how anyone can do that...". Seriously, I tried, many times in fact, to find a way to make Adagio work for me, and couldn't do it. I know that if I sat down and wrote strictly for it, I could get some decent results, but that is really, really hard for me to do. It's the same if I use a library like Symphobia. I can start a piece with it, but at some point I'm going to want to do something it can't, and that is just endlessly frustrating to me. But I knew that when I bought Symphobia, I got it for the effects primarily. Adagio was promoted to be the best string library ever made, and on paper it looks REALLY impressive, but I was just really let down after I got it.


----------



## KingIdiot (Jul 6, 2013)

TSU @ Sat Jul 06 said:


> KingIdiot, good point! Agree with you. But not all can have all libraries. And people try to spend their money wise. And secondly, this is natural aspiration to have a one magical library that can do everything. This is very hard to use many different libraries with unique sound, interface, dynamics and workflow.
> 
> People share their subjective opinions and experience with those who don't have enough of it for make decision or just need alternative view point or just looking information about libraries they don't have. Forum by nature the place where all speaks for themselfs I think.
> 
> ...




My point is, there is no holy grail, and people tend to want to justify their purchases, or gravitate to being kinder to developers they've created a repertoire with. It's the nature of these boards in general.

And not being able to have it all never stopped guitar players from buying a guitar they thought would help them make the sound they're looking for.

Again, it's NOT about buying it all. I know guys who've got every thing and sound like shit. hell I had nearly everythign and my writing was mostly, severely, hacky with it. I know guys who can write and orchestrate like it comes from them through magic, but give them a library and it sounds like Stephan Harkin's voice box had sex with Glados and their made the music.

It's not just about objectivity here, it's the quest itself. There is no end, or answer that is correct, because the question is flawed.

Which library has stacattos that will do this, with an example is going to help a lot more. As is, I need a library with expressive vibrato and moving legato.

I need a library that has a coherent, and consistent sound.

I need the library that is most flexible in my mixes.

I have XXXXX library, and want to make it sound like this part of XXXXX score, what do you suggest I do?

specifics are where discussion is going to be beneficial even when one can only try to be objective.

The general, broad question... not so much. It's the same cycle of answers and voices from different bodies.

Just do a search.

I think communities are best used to actually discuss things helpful outside of saving money from our wallet. These tools are powerful. Used in conjunction with the tools we already have. they can be incredible

I'm working on a lib right now that I'm super impressed with the tonality of. Interestingly enough, I broke out some strings I made for myself using what was available 10 years ago, and there's a very similar characteristic in tone. It took ten fucking years for someone to get close to what I wanted... it's better than what I had 10 years ago, but man I'm happy and impressed with what I was able to achieve back then (tonality wise, this was a bit before VSL came on the scene and changed our ideas).

I'm just saying, there are better questions to be asked, and better ways we can use our shared knowledge.

but hey, I'm not doing it like everyone else, and I'm probably wrong and I'm an idiot for not thinking like everyone else 

we can all help to push ourselves out of the cycle, by asking questions back and refining the process, instead of being laptop reviewers who don't have to worry about advertising revenue.

That said, it is comfy to come back and see the same game happening, like walking into an old fave pub. o-[][]-o


----------



## Casiquire (Jul 6, 2013)

jamwerks @ Sat 06 Jul said:


> I wonder how many people who still prefer VSL actually has other libraries, or if they just hesitate to buy, being happy with what they have. After all the music is more important than the samples.
> 
> I have pretty much everything of VSL, but since buying Sable, Adagio, HS, HB, HOW, CB, CWW, etc. I've taken VSL out of my template. To me the downside by VSL is their Silent Stage recording room. But when they decided to build it about 15 years ago, it probably seemed like the best room for sampling.



I use many libraries...VSL's solo strings and woodwinds are the absolute best I've used or heard. Their brass is a perfect complement to Hollywood Brass--a bit more tame, more precise in terms of pitch, more consistent legato, and greater detail. HB can reach higher dynamics for more power and sometimes has more character. At the moment, I don't think there's a single perfect brass library out there, but I haven't tried Dimension Brass yet which may get very close.

If your main concern is the Silent Stage, that means you prefer to use libraries with more room sound. It doesn't mean VSL is bad and unusable or outdated. Maybe you feel the need to move on to newer and shinier libraries but you're insinuating that people who use VSL are in some way flawed and can't keep up with the times which is very narrow-minded. If you've never given VSL+MIR a test run, you should. No other library out there can sound that good and flexible, and the only way to do that was to record in the Silent Stage.


----------



## Vlzmusic (Jul 6, 2013)

Sascha

You have to understand, that many praises of "sound" that people give to VSL (myself included), refer not only to coloristic aspects of sound production quality, but the actual content they hear. I am sorry, but when I go from note A to note B, that is what I want to hear, not a sample A + legato smurf + sample B.

I admit, that the samples I posted on the previous page may not be the most convincing, but its rather my fault, not the lib - cause I should take better care and polish the sound. Still this is a lib that plays what I want, not the other way around.


----------



## Tanuj Tiku (Jul 6, 2013)

Oooh! More VSL hate...

Well here are some of my examples...there is another thread going on about Brass and I am going to post here some mixed examples. Everything is 95% VSL. In some cases, you may hear LASS Cello which was added in post production by additional programmers and I use Spitfire solo strings layered sometimes.

But its mostly VSL. MIR was not used in any of these as I do not have it. 

First up is a Hybrid track because people often feel VSL cannot sound loud and bombastic:

* Way Out II: https://soundcloud.com/tanujtiku/way-out-ii - All orchestral elements are 100% VSL except one solo cello spiccato part from Spitfire solo strings.

* T-A-C: https://soundcloud.com/tanujtiku/t-a-c (Some Orchestral String Runs used)

* Nebula: https://soundcloud.com/tanujtiku/nebula (woodwinds and all from VSL)

* Dome - http://www.tanuj-tiku.com/Dome.wav (www.tanuj-tiku.com/Dome.wav) 

* AA2 - http://www.tanuj-tiku.com/AA2.wav (www.tanuj-tiku.com/AA2.wav) 

* RB - http://www.tanuj-tiku.com/RB.mp3 (www.tanuj-tiku.com/RB.mp3) 

* Solo Horn - http://www.tanuj-tiku.com/SoloHorn.mp3 (www.tanuj-tiku.com/SoloHorn.mp3) 

* RB2 - http://www.tanuj-tiku.com/RB2.mp3 (www.tanuj-tiku.com/RB2.mp3) 

* AA1 - http://www.tanuj-tiku.com/AA1.wav (www.tanuj-tiku.com/AA1.wav) 

* Hide and Seek: All VSL except Hollywoodwinds: https://soundcloud.com/tanujtiku/hide-and-seek


Some of these are basic pre-mixes and up front as well to make it clear. 


You guys should definitely hear some of Daryl Griffith's music made with VSL. Guy Bacos also does a great job!


Best,

Tanuj.


----------



## Arbee (Jul 6, 2013)

Tanuj, you are an inspiration - great work! o-[][]-o 

.


----------



## Tanuj Tiku (Jul 6, 2013)

Sascha,

There is no 'reference'. At the end of the day, I am not trying to convince you to buy VSL or say that its the best and only solution. 

These are just my own demos and if you do not like even one of them and feel that none of it stands a chance against all the new libraries, then by all means, you are allowed to have that opinion. 

I like what some of the other libraries are doing these days. But, VSL works very well for me and I have had nobody in my short lived career so far tell me that it sounded very bad or it needed Sable or EastWest. Its mostly been the case with my writing and choice of musical palette. 

I admire your music and I have heard what you can achieve with some of those samples. I think some of them are very good but limited and some are probably very good as well.

VSL is a philosophy to an extent. Daryl made some amazing points and they are exactly the reasons why current owners of VSL continue to use their samples. 

But nothing is perfect. Not even VSL. I just prefer working with it over others. I have tried LASS and the shorts are very nice. My music gets layered with LASS a lot of times in post production. 

But if we are really talking about quality projects and feature films which I work on a lot, we almost always get a live string section recorded. 

It is very rare that I would work on a big project with no money to record any musicians. It is not that expensive.

I like libraries that can allow me to write quickly what I want to and VSL has continued to serve this purpose. So, I have no reason to change anything.

Just like I do not use a mac because PC seems a better choice to me. But if Apple were to come out with something that was better for me, I will switch. Hey, I even have an iPhone!

But just as you have your opinion, I have mine. I still use VSL a lot and it gets used in TV shows, films and commercials with no problems as such. 

Nothing out there sounds that much better than VSL. Some new libraries seem case specific. They have a very strong character and VSL can be used in many ways simply because of the way it was recorded.

At the end of the day, nobody is going to say that the music sounds crap because the reverb is 5% less happening than Adagio. 

I admire all the hard work all the developers put into their product. Nobody wants to make anything bad. 

There are some very nice things in Sable and I might get it at some point to add to VSL. But I see no reason to give up VSL and use other libraries completely. 

The smear is a problem for me and it is very much evident in the samples. 

VSL solo strings are nice but I can never get it to sound very good. Others have done it before. 

I just got the Embertone solo violin and it sounds really good. I got it do something VSL cant at this point - not as convincingly. 

So there are some nice things out there but for me VSL still stands tall. 


Tanuj.


----------



## parnasso (Jul 6, 2013)

I guess I have to chime in on this one even though I think that these discussions usually don't lead anywhere…

Anyway, a couple of points regarding VSL strings (with the exception of Dimension Strings which I think are very different): the problem for me is not so much the sound in itself or the lack of ambience or the difficulty to put them in a believable and convincing space. I think all VSL samples are recorded very well and they respond very well to EQ and processing in general. So, with good ER's and tails or even better with MIR you can put them in any space you like and the result will sound acceptably good.

For me the real problem with VSL strings is the lack of detail and "resolution" in the patches itself:

First, they simply don't have enough velocity layers - quite often there are only 2 layers and the maximum I think is 4. Whenever you make a crescendo or decrescendo by crossfading with the modwheel the sound stays relatively the same and there's little change in timbre. It just gets louder and softer. In Hollywood Strings for example there are up to 13 different dynamic layers and crossfading between them you can notice a continuous change in timbre which to my ears sounds much more authentic and detailed.

Second, VSL strings don't offer patches where you can crossfade between non vibrato and vibrato. I know that you can create those patches yourself in the VI player by combining a normal legato patch with a vibrato patch - I have tried this myself - but the results are not as good and seamless as in properly programmed patches like in Hollywood Strings or other libraries. But being able to program your own specific vibrato curve that follows your musical thought is of fundamental importance for creating beautiful and musically convincing melody lines… how do you do without vibrato control?

Third, you can't influence the finger position in VSL strings: while that may seem a less important feature to some people I think it adds a few possibilities in colour and sound and offers an extra layer of authenticity (in Hollywood Strings and Cinematic Strings you can choose between a variety of positions).

And finally I'm not that convinced of the legato transitions, I find them rather bumpy and inflexible, and they sound always the same. I know that you can change the transitions with the Start Offset parameters, maybe this can help, but it would be nice if you could change the transition independently from note to note according to the musical result you want to obtain: sometimes more pronounced and sometimes smoother and softer. In nearly all other libraries you can change the legato transition by velocity or some CC controller.

Now, with this being said, you can of course use the "dynamic" patches in the extended libraries with its many pre-recorded crescendo-diminuendo, fortepiano, sforzato, with and without vibrato, progressive vibrato etc. etc. but then you have the same approach as in Adagio strings and you face the same problems! That is that you have to write for the library… and I think in the end it's rather improbable that one of those pre-recorded phrases fits exactly your composition. Of course you can time-stretch those phrases but c'mon, that's really tedious…

So, to sum up my point: in my opinion (and as long as you don't use its pre-recorded phrases) VSL strings don't allow for enough expression and nuances in comparison to other libraries because they lack a variety of features. And I think this also shows in the demos on the VSL site. Whenever there are pieces with long legato lines that require a lot of expression and nuances VSL strings always sound stiff and mechanical to me (in fact I think that besides some marvelous pieces that consist of mainly non-legato stuff there are also some rather horrible renditions of classical pieces on the VSL site…). In Hollywood Strings for example you simply have a couple of parameters more that allow you to really sculpt your musical lines and breathe live into it. Just listen to some of Thomas Bergersen's demos for HS… even if someone may say that he doesn't like that kind of string sound per se I think that nobody can deny that there is a lot of expression and nuances in it. Just listen to "Shipwrecked" with all its swells and imagine to do that piece with VSL strings… I don't think it would come off as good as with HS.
The Hollywood Strings sound is certainly not suitable for everything but you're not limited to that thick "Hollywood" sound: with the variety of microphone positions and a little EQ you can also get a lighter and more classical sound while still retaining the richness and the detail.

Again, nothing that I've written on VSL refers to Dimension Strings which I think addresses all the shortcomings of former VSL string libraries and adds all those missing features I mentioned above (and much more). On the VSL site there are already some really beautiful demos for Dimension Strings by Guy Bacos that sound very promising (I especially like "The Garden Rendezvous").

And Daryl, I think there's no need to react in such an indignant way to Jamwerks... he certainly didn't want to insult or not even criticize you, he just asked you a sincere question.


----------



## Gusfmm (Jul 6, 2013)

Leo- I strongly suggest you recheck your facts. 

a) The Long Powerful System sustain patches on HS have between 3 and 5 dynamic layers. Marcato patches, for instance, use 3 layers. Most VSL Orchestral Strings short+long patches have 4 dynamic layers. The note on the HS manual that reads "...uses cross-fades with 13 simultaneous voices for each note..." doesn't refer exclusively to dynamic layer samples.

b) There are specific non-vib and vib patches on any VSL strings, and the Xfading is perfectly acceptable in IMO. Maybe better in other libraries? Maybe. Just as likely as that the VSL legato be better and more flexible than most other libraries. 

c) VIP has several controls that allow you to adjust not only attack, but also release, velocity scale, etc. On the 'Perform' tab. These are all assignable to any CC you'd like.



But I totally agree with you in that this whole diatribe is as pointless as trying to convince my friend that there maybe better cars out there other than his beloved BMW's. Or that Brazil's soccer team maybe better than Argentina's. 

Because it always DEPENDS.

And as such, the simple conclusion should have been reached much earlier, more easily, without all the unnecessary argumentation: there is no such Holy Grail of strings out there. None.

And let's not forget that besides the libraries, their samples and number of dynamic layers, there is the skill of the mock-up artist using them. A factor of equal weight in the perception of quality of any of these packages.


----------



## MarkS_Comp (Jul 6, 2013)

I think the real problem here is that almost nobody here knows what real strings are supposed to sound like. If all of you did, this convo would be VERY different.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Jul 6, 2013)

As I said about 40 posts ago, how can there POSSIBLY be a "Holy Grail" library when collectively we don't even agree as to what a "Holy Grail" would be?

it is possible for a thread to be less illuminating than this in theory, but I cannot recall one. 

But I don't suppose people will just let it end now, right?


----------



## Arbee (Jul 6, 2013)

Among the many reasons for this thread being rather futile - a) many composers are looking for a "better than real" string sound and some libraries do this well for a specific style, b) some libraries are more forgiving out of the box for those with little interest and/or experience with "real" orchestration and c) a slightly sceptical little voice in my head that says "please declare any, even if only small, commercial interests before expressing an opinion in a thread of this nature".

I've heard amazing and hideous demo's produced with all of the strings libraries mentioned in this thread (and I have no commercial interests whatsoever). In my case VSL/MIR suits simply because of its flexibility, consistency and quality. If DS hadn't arrived however I may have bought Adagio, CS, HS, LASS or Sable by now, which can all probably "beat" VSL in a particular style of music, but not IMO across the board.

.


----------



## Casiquire (Jul 6, 2013)

Sascha, my post was in response to someone who owns VSL libraries meaning they can test run VSL+MIR for themselves, which is the only true way to see the capabilities they offer. I will put zero time and zero effort into proving that in my opinion VSL+MIR is fantastic because I'm not a spokesperson for VSL and I'd rather cut the argument off right now and say watch the videos, download the demos, and if you try the product and don't like it, we're allowed to disagree. I doubt it would matter if I post something anyway since your mind is already made up. Part of me is wondering if I should post a demo of a real live orchestra playing and pretend it's VSL just to see the reactions, but I'm not dishonest.

Meanwhile the topic is being derailed into an argument despite the fact that I believe Jay has already answered the original question more than once.


----------



## Resoded (Jul 7, 2013)

MarkS_Comp @ 7th July 2013 said:


> I think the real problem here is that almost nobody here knows what real strings are supposed to sound like. If all of you did, this convo would be VERY different.



Enlighten us Mark, what would the discussion be if everyone were very experienced with how real strings are supposed to sound like?


----------



## germancomponist (Jul 7, 2013)

Sascha Knorr @ Sun Jul 07 said:


> And there is another thing... Legato... is this really the horizon and the one and only quality attribute of a sample library? From my view you can do very nice mockups without that "True Legato" at all.



+1 !!!


----------



## Daryl (Jul 7, 2013)

MarkS_Comp @ Sun Jul 07 said:


> I think the real problem here is that almost nobody here knows what real strings are supposed to sound like. If all of you did, this convo would be VERY different.


Now Mark, if you're trying to suggest that people should actually know what they are talking about, or even have some experience before stating an opinion, then you are on the wrong forum I'm afraid. :lol: 

D


----------



## parnasso (Jul 7, 2013)

Gusfmm said:


> a) The Long Powerful System sustain patches on HS have between 3 and 5 dynamic layers. Marcato patches, for instance, use 3 layers. Most VSL Orchestral Strings short+long patches have 4 dynamic layers. The note on the HS manual that reads "...uses cross-fades with 13 simultaneous voices for each note..." doesn't refer exclusively to dynamic layer samples.


Gusfmm, you're right, thank you for correcting me on the number of dynamic layers in HS, I didn't remember it correctly, I'm sorry. But if you read what's written in the HS manual - let me quote:



> The “Sus 13” instruments in this folder (...) play 13 voices simultaneously,which provides more dynamic levels available as CC 11 changes, as follows:
> • 5 levels of loudness for non-vibrato
> • 5 levels of loudness for vibrato
> • 3 levels of loudness for molto vibrato


you will see that if you add crossfades between non-vibrato and vibrato there are nevertheless 5+5+3=13 different layers at your disposal that allow for very detailed timbre changes and a relatively big variety of expression.
I loaded up a few Appassionata patches (I have Standard + Extended) in order to check the velocity layers but I still see that most of them have only 2 layers (you can look it up under Advanced View -> Advanced), only very few of them have 4 layers. And in my opinion you can hear that lack of "resolution" when you play those Appassionata patches against the HS Powerful system ones.

I played around with the Start, Attack and Release parameters under Perform, but I wasn't able to obtain a really satisfying result, at least not for my taste. I'm sorry but I find the legato in newer string libraries more convinving.
The same thing goes for creating crossfadeable non-vib/vib patches in the VI player, in my opinion it just gets smeary, whereas the HS patches are clearer and offer a bigger range of vibrato (there are 3 different vibrato intensities to crossfade between after all).

But I agree, in the end everyone should work with the libraries that he/she prefers and the most important thing is the music you create with it and how much musicality and expression you put into it.

Peace o-[][]-o


----------



## MarkS_Comp (Jul 7, 2013)

Daryl @ Sun Jul 07 said:


> Now Mark, if you're trying to suggest that people should actually know what they are talking about, or even have some experience before stating an opinion, then you are on the wrong forum I'm afraid. :lol:
> 
> D



Yeah - I am quickly finding that out :roll:


----------



## Tanuj Tiku (Jul 7, 2013)

+1


----------



## Orchestrada (Jul 7, 2013)

Hello again and.... WOW, this has gone in every possible direction! :o 

Should maybe not be that surprised since I asked such a general question. Anyways I have learned a ton - from what to ask for, and to what I'm actually in need of. My reason for asking this question in the first place is that I'm really looking for one library to focus on in the beginning, so I won't have to think about samples for some time, but rather on the artwork of orchestration. I truly admire all the guys striving for perfection in the mock-up world - you are truly artists! I just know myself good enough to foresee that I could easily get tangled up in the "what's new?"-world and buying gear for all my money, when what I really wanna spend my bucks on is real sessions with a real orchestra. But again, seeing the growing need of beeing an ok+ mock-up maker to even get there, I am looking for what I tabloidly called "the Holy Grail".

Believe or not - your very divergent perspectives on my original post - helped me a lot. 

Thank you for enduring a technological newbie. o[])


----------



## Vlzmusic (Jul 7, 2013)

Sascha

Honestly, I fail to see the people who hijacked this thread with "VSL sounds best" posts. Moreover, I fail to see, what do you actually suggest? What tools can you advise the topic starter. Please, be my guest, and then we will see, how they stand the test of being "main" lib for budget minded investment.


----------



## Hannes_F (Jul 7, 2013)

Vlzmusic @ Sun Jul 07 said:


> Sascha
> 
> ... I fail to see, what do you actually suggest? What tools can you advise the topic starter. Please, be my guest, and then we will see, how they stand the test of being "main" lib for budget minded investment.



Sascha,
I've read your posts and listened to your music with great interest. Valid arguments and food for thought. However I second what Vlzmusic writes here - what is it that you actually recommend to the topic starter in context of what has been said in this thread? Probably Hollywood strings Diamond instead of Adagio?


----------



## Tanuj Tiku (Jul 7, 2013)

Sascha,

You make some fair points. Look, nobody wants to fight! There is no point. You dont like VSL and thats completely ok man! 

At the end of the day, there is no end to this discussion. whatever makes you write better music and makes it sound the best for your personal taste, wins it.


I can only speak for myself. I provided the music examples only as a way to let the original author of this thread know what could be achieved with VSL. My mock-ups are in no way the best sounding but they are some of the best that I have personally done. 

I do not hate any library. In fact, I mentioned early on that I admire all the passion they put into their libraries and some of them do a lot of stuff really well. But, once again it has not motivated me enough to move from VSL completely which does not mean that they are all bad. It's just my own judgement of what I want to buy at what time and use to be able to continue to make music. 

I don't think I said anywhere that VSL is the holy grail. In fact, I mentioned that VSL is not perfect at all. I has many flaws. And the Embertone example I gave is precisely where some nice libraries augment my VSL set up. 

I just provided the examples for the person who needed to make a decision to listen and make an informed decision. You or anyone or everyone may not like them but I just shared them from a point of view to help someone who is trying to make up his mind.

If any one of us were ever to meet in person, I do not think we will ruin a possible fun time because I was using VSL and you were using Spitfire Sable or something. 

We are all musicians and above all its the music that matters. These are just tools. I have heard people make terrible music with the best tools and people make good music from not very high-end tools. 

In fact, before I posted here, I had posted some of these examples once again to help someone who was trying to make a decision in another thread. I have always said that I cannot speak with certainty about other libraries because I do not own them. I like some demos, others not so much. 

And thats it!

And for the Cinesonique competition which you won with your brilliant music was not so much focused on programming and production but mostly the music and I can tell you for sure that both Daryl and Mike knew what they were hearing  which is something you already perhaps know!

We had a system in place for the marking which was discussed between all three of us. I was never on the judging panel because I fear I am not that good a composer or a programmer/producer. So, I left it to some of the finest people I know on this forum. 

Happy thoughts everyone!


Tanuj.


----------



## bmiller360 (Jul 8, 2013)

I think the 8dio line, in general sounds terrific. I don't have the strings, but the clarinet and other winds have a feature that almost makes them unusable for me. There is an arc in the expression that appears to be part of the legato samples that is very troublesome for me, yet the 8dio people (who are very bright and professional) have defended this issue as being important to the realism of the instruments. I can comfortably say, as a very experienced composer in LA and having worked with the finest players in the world, this "effect" would cause someone to be "taken off the list" immediately. If I want a crescendo-decrescendo in the middle of every held note....I'd write it!!!
Consequently, if the strings have this "built in arc" in their long notes, that would be an immediate sea-breaker for me.


----------



## germancomponist (Jul 8, 2013)

Everyone is allowed to use what he likes. There are so many good sounding libraries and I see no reason to argue about it. 

I have heared many good demos, done with 8dio Strings. Also many others done with other libs... .  

Sometimes you need a special library today, what you didn't like yesterday. It always depends..... .


----------



## iaink (Jul 8, 2013)

*VSL vs Adagio*

Since there has been some mention of VSL vs Adagio, here is a comparison of the two (first, VSL SE and second, Adagio):

https://soundcloud.com/iainkelso/vsl-se-vs-adagio

These are not the Dimension strings.

In general, to arrive at the "best result" with VSL takes much less time than Adagio. I have used 5 tracks with VSL and 21 for the Adagio.

iain


----------



## Dan Mott (Jul 8, 2013)

The holy grail is the real thing :D

All libraries are good for specific things and not everything.

That's all I have to say....

I agree with The King


----------



## Arbee (Jul 8, 2013)

Dan-Jay @ Tue Jul 09 said:


> The holy grail is the real thing :D


.....with a _good_ string section. There is nothing holy about a less-than-good live string section, quite the opposite  Anyone here ever been presented on live TV with the "hottest looking string section the contractor could find" to work with rather than the best players? >8o 

.


----------



## Dan Mott (Jul 8, 2013)

Arbee @ Tue Jul 09 said:


> Dan-Jay @ Tue Jul 09 said:
> 
> 
> > The holy grail is the real thing :D
> ...



Well what I'm saying is. The holy grail is the real thing because you can make whatever you are recording.. DO whatever you want without the limitations of samples. Assuming you have found good players, as well as being a good player your self. For example, I'd rather play a real guitar/piano/string instrument, ect... for a track than use crappy samples which can only do so much.

I'm getting bored of samples these days, (except for a couple). 

I do not play enough and when I do sit at a real piano, or play a real guitar, ect.. The music just flows and I come up with something a lot easier. I'd assume simply telling the string players what to play and it just... PLAYS would be amazing too.

String sections are a bummer though, I couldn't afford real players. 

My holy grail would be Hollywood Strings if the divisi samples WEREN'T done in mono. Ah!!! If they were stereo then BAM! There's my lovely big string section and my lovely chamber string section. After that, it's only a matter of finding solo instruments which I haven't heard one I like yet.


----------



## Vision (Jul 9, 2013)

vibrato @ Sun Jul 07 said:


> Sascha,
> 
> 
> At the end of the day, there is no end to this discussion. whatever makes you write better music and makes it sound the best for your personal taste, wins it.



Tanuj, your string compositions are (have always been) awesome. And to me this is more a testament to your writing skill and your ear, more than the libraries you use. 

Vi-controlers generally have been around the block. There is a good mix of semi-pros, Pros, AAA list composers, and beginners here. Most of the composers here are musical snobs..  in a good way though. There is a lot of personal preference, based on real world experience. 

My point.. to the OP: I would suggest finding a library that caters to your strengths, and your style of writing first. Obviously, some are better than others at given tasks. So, in my personal opinion this is where your personal research needs comes in. Be realistic with what your current needs are, because you don't want to be overwhelmed by stuff you don't need. I don't envy you honestly, because there are so many choices lately for someone just getting into this. 

The style of (orchestral) music I generally gravitate to is impressionism. Personally, sonically, I prefer my samples to have somewhat of an "Imperfection", something that suspends disbelief to at least the average listener. I look at these libraries as tools, with different personalities. They all bring something to the table. At the end of the day, all of these libraries IMO can make realistic mock up music. Your skill level, hardware setup, and your musical expectations.. to name a few things, should come into play also.


----------



## 667 (Jul 9, 2013)

Dan-Jay @ Mon Jul 08 said:


> My holy grail would be Hollywood Strings if the divisi samples WEREN'T done in mono. Ah!!! If they were stereo then BAM! There's my lovely big string section and my lovely chamber string section. After that, it's only a matter of finding solo instruments which I haven't heard one I like yet.


I've been complaining about the mono divisi mics since HS was first released. But I finally did a very quick test of them in MIR and it sounded very good. Finally gave those mono mics some decent space. Give them a try in MIR, VSS, or other spatializer..


----------



## jamwerks (Jul 9, 2013)

I've read a lot of posts of people talking about VSL (positive & negative), and I have the impression that there is rather wide-spread non-imformation around.

By VSL's own declarations, the VSL recording stage (the Silent Stage), is not "dry", rather it yields a reverb time of 500ms.

I don't know the exact size of the room, but from pictures, I'd imagine around 20 meters in each direction. We know that sound travels at 340 meters per second, so in .5 seconds (500ms), sound moves 170 meters. So at 20 meters per direction, that's 8.5 reflections (170 divided by 20).

So in that (small) space, you have the sound bouncing from wall to wall to floor to ceiling to wall..., 8 times. In the real world, you would never rent such a small room to record anything orchestral, it gives you a closet effect, a high degree of early reflections, with no "breathing space" around it. To my ears the louder the instrument, the more of a problem, with double basses, cellos, and bass drums being the worst.

There is also the question of the proximity of the mic position to the source. VSL mic's are fairly close. Is any recording we hear though, we either hear a mixture of mic positions ranging from 3-15 meters (circa) from the orchestra/instruments, or just distant one's. Never close mic's only.

The Spitfire Sable mic position video walk-through is revealing as to how different each of those positions sounds. And you can't fake those differences. From close up, there is more noise (bow noise, breath noise), a different frequency balance, and a different prospective of the sound. Can you imagine taking Sables close mic's, and building the main mic's from just that, playing them back through an IR of main mic. Does that magically turn that into a main mic sound?

I often read, "VSL is hard to put in a believable space. Vibrato even opened a thread here about 6 months ago saying he lost detail on big VSL mixes. With the higher level of the "noisy" part of the instrumental sound from the close mic's, then putting this sound bouncing 8 times around a small room, into a bigger one, ours ears then become lost, mine do anyway.

If you listen to the last demos that Guy Bacos put up (Spring Awakening, and Frühling Walzer), you can clearly hear these effects. To my ears there is a terrible build-up in frequencies, and no depth in the sound stage. If realness in the samples is what they wants to show, to me it doesn't come close. In 2013, why simulate mic positions & stage positions when you can now have the real thing?

It should go without saying, but I'll say it anyway, that the "quality" of the samples is not the most important aspect, and doesn't make music. It's of course the artistic organization of these sounds that make music. And great music can by definition be made with any library.

I find VSL works great on hybrid pieces (with synths, big drums, etc). These don't have lots of "room information", so VSL lacking real space, fits in perfectly (imo).

When the Silent stage was built (15 years ago?), that probably seemed like the best possible space for sampling-programming at the time. Look at the progress though in the last years. When CS recorded in Sony, Thomas from EW came here and said "you'll never be able to program legato in that big space". 3 years ago, Spitfire had trouble programming proper legato from their main mics (the solo strings). Now 3 years later they even have wonderful sounding ambient mics playing legato.

And to stay on topic (Adagio), those guys really know have to record and program legato imo. They need to be careful though, non-static samples are nice in some situations, and some instrument. Their strings work very well. But in their recent clarinet, that just doesn't work imo. Clarinetists very rarely play the molto expressivo singing legato. So they really need to always have both.

With VSL, I used to use the dynamic samples in melodies, to get this same cantabile effet, and it worked quite well...


----------



## Tanuj Tiku (Jul 9, 2013)

jamwerks,


You are right that VSL presents a huge challenge at first and getting it to sound right takes a bit of time and skill. Other libraries will definitely sound good and inspirational out of the box. I got Spitfire solo strings based on the demo and while I use it also a lot, its limited in its use. This is where VSL shines for me.

My post about 6 months back was case specific. Like all libraries, VSL cannot do everything right. And its partly down to my skill at times and partly well just to samples.

I know you say VSL has this problem or that it is dry by that logic even LASS is in almost the same category. It is perhaps marginally wetter than VSL samples.

Yet, I never hear this problem from people about LASS being too dry. I never hear about people complaining about massive tuning issues with it (since been rectified I believe) or with Cinebrass and countless other problems with so many libraries - including VSL having its own.

The other day I heard a car pass by on a 8dio library sample (old version) - It was their choir. A friend was playing something and in the end there was some sort of a car passing by kind of sound. I am not putting them down! I own several 8Dio libraries and use them daily and they work very well.

The noise floor gets exposed under certain circumstances. Many of us work on feature films that need a high quality mix in a 5.1 situation where everything is amplified. 

So yes, quality control is very important and all these room problems fade out when you get live musicians to perform on top of your music - a regular thing when you work on projects where basic quality and standard is required - like feature films.

Definitely for me, the quality of the samples is also very important. 

In the end, like I said, it does not matter which library is used by whoever. If it works for you - that's awesome!

If you use East West or Adagio it doesnt make your music less worthy or something and same with VSL. 

VSL is not the holy grail - far from it. I actually like LASS for some of the things and I am looking to either buy Spitfire or LASS at some point myself. 

No doubt that they do some things really well. And definitely some things that VSL does not do as well sometimes. 

But I seriously do not see the dry samples being a huge problem. People are even using Samplemodeling to great effect - Check out demos from Blakus or even Daryl posted some examples a while back. 

I believe VSL has fallen prey to certain misconceptions about it being not usable because it was recorded in the silent stage or that their samples are dead! Some of the demos done with VSL pro edition also sound better than a lot of epic music made with newer libraries. Because in the end its the music as mentioned earlier by Vision. 

It is clear that you do not prefer VSL and that is totally fine! Of course! 

I never hear a piece of music from anyone on this forum and think - God, this would have sounded so much better if this guy had used VSL or Spitfire or whatever. So many pieces have layers or are mixed so smartly sometimes, I can't always tell which library was used. 

I will only think of what could be better in terms of programming or musically or just mixing/dynamics etc.

I just got Embertone solo violin and nailed a part that I cant even begin to implement with VSL solo strings. 

It sounds beautiful. I still have to figure out everything with all the CC options - but I was working on a score and I heard the demo - it sounded great. I just picked it up and the first thing I did with it - it just sounds wonderful.

Hopefully it can serve more purposes in the future - I think again Embertone is completely dry but its totally fine. I pass it through a good reverb setting and it works!


Best,

Tanuj.


----------



## Gusfmm (Jul 9, 2013)

Some pics from the Silent Stage, definitely not an anechoid space. It'd be interesting though to hear your view on the effect of wall treatment on your calculations.

*Silent Stage view*

















jamwerks @ Tue Jul 09 said:


> I've read a lot of posts of people talking about VSL (positive & negative), and I have the impression that there is rather wide-spread non-imformation around.


You clearly got a point there.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Jul 9, 2013)

To be honest, I've been holding my tongue this whole time: stop looking for it, it's right here!!


----------



## Tanuj Tiku (Jul 10, 2013)

Ned Bouhalassa @ Wed Jul 10 said:


> To be honest, I've been holding my tongue this whole time: stop looking for it, it's right here!!




Hahahhahaha!


----------



## Marko Zirkovich (Jul 10, 2013)

Ned Bouhalassa @ 7/10/2013 said:


> To be honest, I've been holding my tongue this whole time: stop looking for it, it's right here!!



Ned, that's definitely NOT the whole grail. Haven't you seen Indiana Jones? 
"You must choose, but choose wisely."


----------



## northspeed (Jul 12, 2013)

jamwerks @ Wed Jul 03 said:


> EastWest Lurker @ Wed Jul 03 said:
> 
> 
> > if I could only own one, it would be Hollywood Strings.
> ...



I'm getting really tired of his posts. Not doing EW any favours... Let the people talk on this forum without constantly defending/promoting your own product, man!


----------



## Ron Snijders (Jul 12, 2013)

northspeed @ Fri 12 Jul said:


> jamwerks @ Wed Jul 03 said:
> 
> 
> > EastWest Lurker @ Wed Jul 03 said:
> ...


Without wanting to sound like I don't think he can speak for himself, I think Jay is first and foremost a composer. Of course defending EW where needed is part of his job (at least, I assume it is :mrgreen:, but I strongly doubt he'd defend them with such vigor if he thought they weren't worth it.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Jul 12, 2013)

Indeed, Ron, I was offered the job because I was already doing so. But since it annoys some here, I will try to restrict myself to answering factually incorrect statements about EW products rather than praising its products.


----------



## lucianogiacomozzi (Jul 12, 2013)

I've seen Jay praise plenty of libraries as a composer... I don't recall it being restricted to EW ones. I want more EW libraries now and I wouldn't hesitate to say it if I worked for them either, so why should he?


----------



## Casiquire (Jul 12, 2013)

Jay has a much more fair opinion than he gets credit for. Anybody remember his praise for the Friedlander violin? Now does anybody remember him praising QL Violin? The reason he speaks so highly of Hollywood Strings is because they sound fantastic. While EWQL is known for great-sounding libraries, I think it'll be a long time before they top HS. And I say this as an openly LASS-obsessed consumer with no ties to any sample developer.


----------

