# Replacement for EWQLSO Gold in 2018?



## cato (Mar 2, 2018)

Hi there,

I've been using EWQLSO Gold Pro for a number of years now and slowly been building up my arsenal with things like the Spitfire Albion collection. I've mainly been using EWQLSO Gold for so long because it's lightweight / quick to load up and still has a semi-decent sound to it.

However, it's time to upgrade to a better sound and I need a decent all-in-one package that will replace it. Would something like Orchestral Tool's Ark do it? I like Spitfire Albion's stuff, but it takes a while to find what I'm looking for, has a very specific sound and sometimes just doesn't fit in with my mixes that well (even though it sounds great).

Any advice appreciated.

Thanks,

Cato


----------



## d.healey (Mar 2, 2018)

What do you mean by "a better sound"? The EW stuff is fantastically recorded and aside from some unexpected noises every now and again the samples sound really good.


----------



## Lionel Schmitt (Mar 2, 2018)

Maybe Sonuscore - The Orchestra?
Or Orchestral Tools - Inspire.
Or Cinesymphony Light.
Don't have those libraries but they are all in one libraries with a similar price that IMO sound much better than EW symphonic orchestra, from the demos.


----------



## oxo (Mar 2, 2018)

cato said:


> I've been using EWQLSO Gold Pro for a number of years now..



ok, you have ilok, PLAY works for you, you need a new full orchestra ...why you will not take a look at the modern hollywood orchestra by EW?


----------



## Ashermusic (Mar 2, 2018)

cato said:


> Hi there,
> 
> I've been using EWQLSO Gold Pro for a number of years now and slowly been building up my arsenal with things like the Spitfire Albion collection. I've mainly been using EWQLSO Gold for so long because it's lightweight / quick to load up and still has a semi-decent sound to it.
> 
> ...



You are comparing apples and oranges when you compare a traditional sampled orchestra with one with pre-cooked combos. Not saying one or the other is better, but it is different composing for them. And QLSO's sound is much better than "semi-decent." If it had true legatos, I think it would still be raved about a lot more.


----------



## Lionel Schmitt (Mar 2, 2018)

d.healey said:


> What do you mean by "a better sound"? The EW stuff is fantastically recorded and aside from some unexpected noises every now and again the samples sound really good.





Ashermusic said:


> And QLSO's sound is much better than "semi-decent." If it had true legatos, I think it would still be raved about a lot more.


I personally find that the strings sound pretty plastic and not very symphonic. They also have some kind of weird harsch 5-7kz frequency squeek going on (a bit like a screaming baby) that I'd have to spend hours getting rid of. 
Overall I'm on board with semi decent. There are some things I hate, a few things I love, and generally most of it sounds "usable"... aside from the missing legato function. 
Just because you sound like it's a "fact" that QLso's sound is great.
All subjective opinions... you think its great, cato and I think it's semi decent (I'm propably even less happy with it than cato). 
Glad that we're all different.


----------



## Ashermusic (Mar 2, 2018)

DarkestShadow said:


> I personally find that the strings sound pretty plastic and not very symphonic. They also have some kind of weird harsch 5-7kz frequency squeek going on (a bit like a screaming baby) that I'd have to spend hours getting rid of.
> Overall I'm on board with semi decent. There are some things I hate, a few things I love, and generally most of it sounds "usable"... aside from the missing legato function.
> Just because you sound like it's a "fact" that QLso's sound is great.
> All subjective opinions... you think its great, cato and I think it's semi decent (I'm propably even less happy with it than cato).
> Glad that we're all different.



Well, as we established in the other thread, you and I have some pretty drastic differences in how we like things to sound. People can make their own decisions, but I will always call it like I see (or hear) it.


----------



## gsilbers (Mar 2, 2018)

cato said:


> Hi there,
> 
> I've been using EWQLSO Gold Pro for a number of years now and slowly been building up my arsenal with things like the Spitfire Albion collection. I've mainly been using EWQLSO Gold for so long because it's lightweight / quick to load up and still has a semi-decent sound to it.
> 
> ...



how about the East west hollywood series. its much better than QL and the price is very good. you can try out with subscirption 1st. 

ark and albion and symphobia rely on recorded sections and do not have separate violins 1 and violins 2, cell etc. 

there is also sonuscore the orchestra.


----------



## Jaap (Mar 2, 2018)

Hey Cato,

Depends of course very much on the sound and style you are after. Maybe post some links to pieces of yourself and maybe others to find out how and what would connect to your best needs?


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (Mar 2, 2018)

DarkestShadow said:


> I personally find that the strings sound pretty plastic and not very symphonic. They also have some kind of weird harsch 5-7kz frequency squeek going on (a bit like a screaming baby) that I'd have to spend hours getting rid of.
> Overall I'm on board with semi decent. There are some things I hate, a few things I love, and generally most of it sounds "usable"... aside from the missing legato function.
> Just because you sound like it's a "fact" that QLso's sound is great.
> All subjective opinions... you think its great, cato and I think it's semi decent (I'm propably even less happy with it than cato).
> Glad that we're all different.



But to be fair: EWQLSO first edition was released in 2004. Sure there are other options available which might sound more appealing these days.



cato said:


> Hi there,
> 
> I've been using EWQLSO Gold Pro for a number of years now and slowly been building up my arsenal with things like the Spitfire Albion collection. I've mainly been using EWQLSO Gold for so long because it's lightweight / quick to load up and still has a semi-decent sound to it.
> 
> ...



What is your budget actually?


----------



## Lionel Schmitt (Mar 2, 2018)

Ashermusic said:


> Well, as we established in the other thread, you and I have some pretty drastic differences in how we like things to sound. People can make their own decisions, but I will always call it like I see (or hear) it.


Was just writing that because I have an issue with such statements sounding like facts...


----------



## zvenx (Mar 2, 2018)

I too have Gold Pro, and if it wasn't for the baked in room/reverb sound in the Gold (no control of microphones), I would still be in love with the sound of it, but indeed 10+ years later it has indeed gotten long in the tooth. I bought Hollywood hoping it would sound at least as nice... For me it doesn't at all.....
I like the sound of spitfire and cinematic studio series personally... although I don't own the spitfire symphony orchestra as yet and still waiting for Alex to complete his CS series...
my two cents.
rsp


----------



## Lionel Schmitt (Mar 2, 2018)

AlexanderSchiborr said:


> But to be fair: EWQLSO first edition was released in 2004. Sure there are other options available which might sound more appealing these days.


(sorry for the second post - missed that)
Yea, sure - taking age into consideration it sounds very good. Isn't it even older? I think I have seen demos by TJ and Mr. Phoenix from 2000 or so...


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (Mar 2, 2018)

DarkestShadow said:


> (sorry for the second post - missed that)
> Yea, sure - taking age into consideration it sounds very good. Isn't it even older? I think I have seen demos by TJ and Mr. Phoenix from 2000 or so...



I am not sure, but I remember the DVD editions from 2004 or something. Anyways, that is already been like 14 years..and that you can still do some decent tracks with that speaks for the product imo :D


----------



## cato (Mar 2, 2018)

Thanks for the responses and apologies, I didn't mean to cause a rift about the sound of EWQLSO - I do like it and think it's versatile (although I definitely agree with DarkestShadow about the 5-7khz harsh / squeakiness).

I suppose my issue is that when I compare it to the sound of other more modern libraries I've heard, or even the VSL cube stuff with a nice reverb on it (which is out of my budget), then I think EWQLSO is lacking, especially the articulations. It's also normal that as time goes on sample libraries usually improve in terms of playability and scripting etc. which is why I'm keen to get something new.



DarkestShadow said:


> Maybe Sonuscore - The Orchestra?
> Or Orchestral Tools - Inspire.
> Or Cinesymphony Light.
> Don't have those libraries but they are all in one libraries with a similar price that IMO sound much better than EW symphonic orchestra, from the demos.



I'll definitely check those out, I'm a fan of Orchestral Tools stuff in general, so leaning towards that option. The type of scoring I do is more subtle minimalist rather than big epic Hollywood scores which the Cinesymphony Lite demos sound like they're geared towards. However, I like the 3gb size of it, that's pretty amazing when compared to the 18gb of OT Inspire! The playability / ease of playing in parts is quite important to me, so I'll have to read up on each of these.


----------



## Mike Fox (Mar 2, 2018)

I still use EWQLSO, but it does have sound quality issues, especially the strings. I don't blame you for wanting something else.

As much as I like the Ark stuff, I wouldnt recommend it for a go-to library. It's a very distinctive sound, drenched in reverb, and limited articulations. You would need all 3 Arks to get a good variety of articulations, and even then, you'll be wanting more. Same with the Albions.

I think Hollywood Orchestra Diamond is the obvious choice here. It sounds just as good as anything else out there if not better. The samples are dry, which gives you a ton of freedom! Wait for a sale, and buy an SSD for the entire library. That's my recommendation. Hell, unlike other libraries, you can even try it out for a small price via Composer Cloud.


----------



## Ashermusic (Mar 2, 2018)

DarkestShadow said:


> Was just writing that because I have an issue with such statements sounding like facts...



The fact that I state my opinions with confidence doesn't mean that i consider them facts, it just means that I have confidence in my opinions, which may be warranted by since I am paid to write them at AskAudio and composers pay me to advise them privately.

You are free to wildly disagree with that assessment


----------



## cato (Mar 2, 2018)

Mike Fox said:


> I think Hollywood Orchestra Diamond is the obvious choice here. It sounds just as good as anything else out there if not better. The samples are dry, which gives you a ton of freedom! Wait for a sale, and buy an SSD for the entire library. That's my recommendation. Hell, unlike other libraries, you can even try it out for a small price via Composer Cloud.



That's actually a good shout, the only issue is that I'm not a fan of Play (although I still use it). Composer Cloud would be a great way to test that out though for sure.



Jaap said:


> Maybe post some links to pieces of yourself and maybe others to find out how and what would connect to your best needs?



Hi Jaap, sure thing, have a listen to some tracks on my website (be gentle, I've still got a long way to go with learning how to score):

http://www.catohoeben.com/



AlexanderSchiborr said:


> What is your budget actually?



Trying to keep below $1,000, but I'm happy to invest if it's likely to last me a while. I make a living from composing so I consider it an investment.


----------



## Wunderhorn (Mar 2, 2018)

I have to agree with Ashermusic, EWQLSO Gold is not bad sounding, even by today's standards. I still have the Kontakt edition from which I still use a few articulations here and there. And yes, if they re-did this, this time with legatos and mic positions - and in Kontakt format, they'd have a huge winner....


----------



## Jaap (Mar 2, 2018)

cato said:


> Hi Jaap, sure thing, have a listen to some tracks on my website (be gentle, I've still got a long way to go with learning how to score):
> 
> http://www.catohoeben.com/



I am enjoying your music Cato! You have a nice subtle layered depth in your sound and writing. In your opening post you mentioned OT Ark, and I have them (and loving them!) but I think these sounds are maybe too big and robust for your music? I think if you want to upgrade to look at products that can give you flexibility and intimacy, but also warmth in your sound. I doubt if there would be one package to cover that and have you thought of shopping around and gather a few products that really fill up your needs and build a good template around that?
If I where in your shoes I probably would take a subscription the EW cloud as you have then a solid base with good orchestral instruments, but also choirs, ethnic instruments (RA and Silk would do lovely in your hands) combined with also some nice percussion (SD2 and SD3 contains some beautiful stuff, not only big smashers) and as well a flexible set of pianos.
For Strings I think Cinematic Studio Strings would suite you very well.

Otherwise if you want to look into a small footprint, but high quality package, I think OT Inspire would be probably a good thing. I don't have it, but they work with smaller ensemble sized setups and based on what I heard and know from others it is a great flexible tool.
If you want to think a bit out of the box and go for the combining stuff, then do check out libraries like Medieval ERA 2 and Ancient ERA Persia as I think you might like them a lot!

Good luck with the decision making Cato!


----------



## Lionel Schmitt (Mar 2, 2018)

cato said:


> Thanks for the responses and apologies, I didn't mean to cause a rift about the sound of EWQLSO - I do like it and think it's versatile (although I definitely agree with DarkestShadow about the 5-7khz harsh / squeakiness). The type of scoring I do is more subtle minimalist rather than big epic Hollywood scores which the Cinesymphony Lite demos sound like they're geared towards.


Yea, I think that too. It's propably best suited for adventurous, more dynamic music from what I've heard. And I think the strings don't have legatos, as far as I know.
The Orchestra actually also seems to be more on the star wars, pirates of the carribian side of things, according to the demos.


----------



## musicalweather (Mar 2, 2018)

I'm also interested in this topic as I'm a long-time user of EWQLSO as well. I also wouldn't rate it above semi-decent. I moved away from the strings quite a long time ago (now have Cinematic Strings 2) and moved to HW Brass Gold not too long ago. Some of the woods are quite ok and the percussion is still very usable. But it's been a struggle to get everything (from different developers) to mesh together, and I'm inclined to get everything from one developer. I'm looking at Berlin, though, yeah, it's super expensive. I'm not such a fan of EW's system of one articulation per instrument, though it sounds like Berlin also kind of works that way...


----------



## quantum7 (Mar 2, 2018)

I was a very happy user of EWQLSO back in the old Kontakt days, but stopped using it when newer libraries started giving me better results. For many years though, EWQLSO was definitely the king of orchestra sample libraries.


----------



## Illico (Mar 3, 2018)

I'm also watching this thread with interest. I'm an EWQLSO user since 2 years, this is my first and only orchestral library. I'm still very happy with these samples. But I'm conscient that it's not very playable, not true legato, etc.
I have the GOLD version. I don't know if platinum version could be interesting. When you see some new libraries like Embertone Solo Violin, I'm dreaming to have an orchestral engine like this.


----------



## WhiteNoiz (Mar 3, 2018)

Judging from your music [quite digging it], I think you'd benefit from a mix n' match approach and drier and smaller section size libraries. I think I'd wait for Chris Hein Ensemble Strings if I were in your shoes. Seems like a really good fit and very feature-rich. VSL seems close also [albeit pricey]. Maybe Chamber or Dimension. Then maybe you can consider stuff like CH Solos, Embertone, Virharmonic, Prague Sounds, Berlin solos, SF Alternative, Emotional Cello, LASS LS or LASS First Chairs as add-ons/extensions. For brass/winds you could stick to CH or maybe look at Impact Soundworks Bravura and Sample Modeling (even Westgate, Kirk Hunter [on sale] or Hollywood Brass [frequent sales]).

For more quirky, maybe check http://www.soniccouture.com/en/ or http://www.cinematique-instruments.com/ or the extended SF strings or Labs. Look around.

Btw, you can demo some of them: https://www.bestservice.com/try-sound.html


----------



## Syneast (Mar 3, 2018)

Many have been mentioned already, but these are the complete orchestral libraries with separate sections that I can think of:

EW Hollywood Orchestra
Sonuscore The Orchestra
Berlin Series
CineSymphony
Spitfire Symphonic Orchestra
NI Symphony Series
Auddict Strings/Brass/Winds (Ok, no percussion)
VSL Strings/brass/winds/perc
8dio Strings/brass/winds (Also no percussion?)

To be a true replacement for EWQLSO it needs to be quite extensive in terms of articulations. EW Hollywood, Berlin, Spitfire, VSL and 8dio will fit that bill, with Hollywood being the least expensive option.


----------



## Tekkera (Mar 3, 2018)

You should definitely get Hollywood Orchestra if you're so keen on Symphonic Orchestra. Unfortunately these days, you will rarely get under 10gb for libraries, as sampling techniques have improved meaning we sample more things in more ways. You're likely only going to get under 10gb for single instruments or on more focused libraries like adventure strings/brass.

You can test out the Hollywood series with composer cloud. It's definitely the best sounding dry library out there if you put the effort in to properly utilize it. Very impressive by EWQL but they haven't innovated in a long time (see: Hollywood choirs, and PLAY engine).


----------



## garyhiebner (Mar 3, 2018)

Syneast said:


> Many have been mentioned already, but these are the complete orchestral libraries with separate sections that I can think of:
> 
> EW Hollywood Orchestra
> Sonuscore The Orchestra
> ...



Cinematic Studio Strings Also has separate String Sections. I jumped from EWQLSO to this String Library and Love it. Will be interesting to see what they do with their Brass Library. And it would be great to see them cover all the orchestral sections. I wouldn't mind my orchestral template being all CS.


----------



## Casiquire (Mar 3, 2018)

You mentioned liking VSL, you could get their Special Editions and have a ton of money left over for reverb or MIR. In fact I would probably suggest that because I can't imagine composing without good reverb!


----------



## novaburst (Mar 3, 2018)

I think this piece is very tough to beat even with todays latest library's, there is feel, presence, dramatics coming through with this piece,

Some EQ here and there and the composer could have taken this even further.

I have always said it and will say it again, its what you do with the library that can make a big difference, to the way it sounds, esp orchestra the very skilful seem to have the magic of making any library sound premium and past the test of time.


----------



## SergeD (Mar 3, 2018)

Great talent (M.Cadmus) + great library


----------



## MarcelM (Mar 3, 2018)

ewql gold can still sound good in 2018


----------



## Syneast (Mar 3, 2018)

garyhiebner said:


> Cinematic Studio Strings Also has separate String Sections. I jumped from EWQLSO to this String Library and Love it. Will be interesting to see what they do with their Brass Library. And it would be great to see them cover all the orchestral sections. I wouldn't mind my orchestral template being all CS.


Mmm, didn't include it because it's not the whole orchestra yet.


----------



## Johnny (Mar 3, 2018)

I still use EWSO Platinum- daily! Use it in conjunction with other libraries! A great sample is a snapshot in time that you cannot reproduce, there are gems throughout the entire library! Tryout some of the brass FX? Gong FX scrapes? Muted Danny Elfman trumpet shorts? Cymbal slices and scrapes? French horn rips? Timed flutter trumpet crescendos? (HW Brass does not have these!) Other newer libraries have of course reproduced some of the above, but they will never be the same. Eastwest "Exquisitely" selected these sample takes from performances recorded before 2008, and just because it is 2018? (Dam I'm getting old...) Newer libraries do not in any way render these takes as being Bantha fodder. Newer libraries only further compliment these beautiful samples! Many film composers I've met throughout my life-time, including myself "still" use these samples on a daily bases! Augment your EWSO with EW Hollywood Strings? CSSS Solo Strings? Or whatever libraries you choose? And enjoy and keep on enjoying because these EWSO samples are musical gold!
Best : )


----------



## Jacob Cadmus (Mar 3, 2018)

novaburst said:


> I think this piece is very tough to beat even with todays latest library's, there is feel, presence, dramatics coming through with this piece,
> 
> Some EQ here and there and the composer could have taken this even further.
> 
> I have always said it and will say it again, its what you do with the library that can make a big difference, to the way it sounds, esp orchestra the very skilful seem to have the magic of making any library sound premium and past the test of time.




Hey thanks for the shoutout! That piece was indeed a nice little experiment to see how QLSO can hold up today. With that being said, I hardly use much of the strings or brass anymore in my everyday templates (at least not at the forefront). As good as this library sounds, there are definitely weak spots that not even good programming can fix, for example the limited dynamic layers which are especially apparent in the strings. You can hear in the first half of my piece when I tried to make the strings flow like an emotional Ghibli tune and instead they just sound like keyboards because the patches I used didn't have those airy soft dynamics.


----------



## Ashermusic (Mar 4, 2018)

novaburst said:


> I think this piece is very tough to beat even with todays latest library's, there is feel, presence, dramatics coming through with this piece,
> 
> Some EQ here and there and the composer could have taken this even further.
> 
> I have always said it and will say it again, its what you do with the library that can make a big difference, to the way it sounds, esp orchestra the very skilful seem to have the magic of making any library sound premium and past the test of time.





Bingo.


----------



## whinecellar (Mar 4, 2018)

Heck yeah, count me among the daily EWQLSO users who still love the library. I have almost the entire thing loaded in one of my older slaves and use it constantly. Almost all the perc stuff, celeste, string shorts, trills and trems, lots of winds and brass (esp. speciality articulations)... heck, I think the only thing I don’t use much anymore are the sustained strings.

I’m grateful for all the current stuff of course, but it astounds me that this library is so useful after 14 years... there are VERY few other things that are. Quite a testament to some very forward thinking and excellent work. And the icing on the cake is that it still works in Kontakt format – it’s extremely efficient!


----------



## khollister (Mar 4, 2018)

whinecellar said:


> Heck yeah, count me among the daily EWQLSO users who still love the library. I have almost the entire thing loaded in one of my older slaves and use it constantly. Almost all the perc stuff, celeste, string shorts, trills and trems, lots of winds and brass (esp. speciality articulations)... heck, I think the only thing I don’t use much anymore are the sustained strings.
> 
> I’m grateful for all the current stuff of course, but it astounds me that this library is so useful after 14 years... there are VERY few other things that are. Quite a testament to some very forward thinking and excellent work. And the icing on the cake is that it still works in Kontakt format – it’s extremely efficient!



No kidding. Both of those examples (as well as many others posted over the years) show just how far ahead of it's time EWQLSO was. Even though I have all of the Spitfire symphonic stuff and all of the Hollywood Orchestra stuff, I still think about picking this up on one of the periodic fire sales. Probably dumb but it does represent incredible value at what it sells for today.


----------



## whinecellar (Mar 4, 2018)

khollister said:


> No kidding. Both of those examples (as well as money others posted over the years) show just how far ahead of it's time EWQLSO was....



I'd buy it just for the celeste, timpani and string shorts. Everything else is (really good) gravy!


----------



## Geoff Grace (Mar 4, 2018)

whinecellar said:


> Heck yeah, count me among the daily EWQLSO users who still love the library. I have almost the entire thing loaded in one of my older slaves and use it constantly. Almost all the perc stuff, celeste, string shorts, trills and trems, lots of winds and brass (esp. speciality articulations)... heck, I think the only thing I don’t use much anymore are the sustained strings.
> 
> I’m grateful for all the current stuff of course, but it astounds me that this library is so useful after 14 years... there are VERY few other things that are. Quite a testament to some very forward thinking and excellent work. And the icing on the cake is that it still works in Kontakt format – it’s extremely efficient!


I'm curious, how are you able to access the old Kontakt format on your current Mac—is it installed on your slave PC or on a pre-Intel Mac? I migrated EWQLSO to Play in 2008 when my G5 died and I purchased an Intel-based Mac Pro. It's been a decade; but my recollection is that my Mac Pro couldn't use, or wouldn't recognize, my old Mac format installer DVDs. 

If there's a way to port my old Kontakt libraries to the current Mac format, I would love to know it. Thanks in advance for any help, and I apologize for asking an off topic question. 

Best,

Geoff


----------



## cato (Mar 6, 2018)

Thanks for all the replies! Really interesting to see demos using EWQLSO by @Jacob Cadmus and the one posted by @Heroix - they sound great. By the way Jacob, what DAW are you using there?



novaburst said:


> I have always said it and will say it again, its what you do with the library that can make a big difference, to the way it sounds, esp orchestra the very skilful seem to have the magic of making any library sound premium and past the test of time.



Absolutely, and although I'm keen to get a new library to fill out the articulations I have available (and temporarily fill that never-ending sensation of wanting the newest instruments), I'll also look at setting up a better template with EWQLSO Gold as it's clear it's still relevant even in 2018. Sonuscore The Orchestra is still tickling my fancy although I'll try out Hollywood Orchestra first on a subscription as a few of you have mentioned it now.


----------



## MarcelM (Mar 6, 2018)

cato said:


> Thanks for all the replies! Really interesting to see demos using EWQLSO by @Jacob Cadmus and the one posted by @Heroix - they sound great. By the way Jacob, what DAW are you using there?
> 
> 
> 
> Absolutely, and although I'm keen to get a new library to fill out the articulations I have available (and temporarily fill that never-ending sensation of wanting the newest instruments), I'll also look at setting up a better template with EWQLSO Gold as it's clear it's still relevant even in 2018. Sonuscore The Orchestra is still tickling my fancy although I'll try out Hollywood Orchestra first on a subscription as a few of you have mentioned it now.



if you want to upgrade i wouldnt go for the orchestra. its simply a choice between hollywood orchestra (cheapest), spitfire audio or orchestral tools. you may also wanna wait a bit until alex wallbank completes his cinematic series. css is the best string library atm by far. though its a bit limited regarding articulations.


----------



## Jacob Cadmus (Mar 6, 2018)

cato said:


> By the way Jacob, what DAW are you using there?



Cockos REAPER 5


----------



## cato (Mar 6, 2018)

Heroix said:


> you may also wanna wait a bit until alex wallbank completes his cinematic series. css is the best string library atm by far. though its a bit limited regarding articulations.



Just heard the demos, the strings are superb - has Alex said a full orchestra plugin is on the cards? Or will it involve buying all the parts individually?


----------



## MarcelM (Mar 6, 2018)

cato said:


> Just heard the demos, the strings are superb - has Alex said a full orchestra plugin is on the cards? Or will it involve buying all the parts individually?



alex said brass and woodwinds will be released this year. not sure if he will offer as a whole package, but i guess there is a chance.


----------



## Mike Fox (Mar 6, 2018)

cato said:


> Just heard the demos, the strings are superb - has Alex said a full orchestra plugin is on the cards? Or will it involve buying all the parts individually?


My guess is that each section will be released individually, one by one. At the end of the day, there will by 4 different libraries, 5 including the piano, and there will probably be a bundle deal. That's probably years away though, and people are banking on every other section being as good as CSS.

Btw, I do think you're making the right choice by taking your time, and not jumping into anything. I can't tell you how many times I've done that, and the amount of money I've wasted.


----------



## cato (Mar 6, 2018)

Mike Fox said:


> Btw, I do think you're making the right choice by taking your time, and not jumping into anything. I can't tell you how many times I've done that, and the amount of money I've wasted.



To be honest I'm also the same, I've got some libraries that I've hardly used and only bought them because I convinced myself I would be able to 'earn back' the cost by composing some tracks for a music library! Still on the digital shelf collecting dust...


----------



## JohnG (Mar 6, 2018)

Heroix said:


> css is the best string library atm by far.



Well, I own CSS and it is excellent but its very conspicuous vibrato is a limitation if CSS is the only string library you own. 

So, if someone's looking for a "replacement for EWQLSO" then this would have to be bourne in mind. I realise there's a non-vib in CSS but it isn't as good or as flexible as some other libraries out there.


----------



## fixxer49 (Mar 6, 2018)

Wunderhorn said:


> I have to agree with Ashermusic, EWQLSO Gold is not bad sounding


out of the box - with no processing - it sounds good. when you try to apply processing is when it's not quite as forgiving, or malleable, or "mixable" as the newer libraries, especially the strings. that may be where some of the complaints of being "harsh" come from.


----------



## Geoff Grace (Mar 6, 2018)

JohnG said:


> Well, I own CSS and it is excellent but its very conspicuous vibrato is a limitation if CSS is the only string library you own.
> 
> So, if someone's looking for a "replacement for EWQLSO" then this would have to be bourne in mind. I realise there's a non-vib in CSS but it isn't as good or as flexible as some other libraries out there.


I don't have this library myself, but my understanding is that you can create vibrato crossfades using Cc 2. Have you tried this, *John*; and if so, how well is it implemented?

An example of this is given in the video below at the 9 minute mark:



Best,

Geoff


----------



## MarcelM (Mar 6, 2018)

JohnG said:


> Well, I own CSS and it is excellent but its very conspicuous vibrato is a limitation if CSS is the only string library you own.
> 
> So, if someone's looking for a "replacement for EWQLSO" then this would have to be bourne in mind. I realise there's a non-vib in CSS but it isn't as good or as flexible as some other libraries out there.



yeah i kinda agree. it has quite alot of vibrato and a dark tone. but if you are fine with this you will get the best and fastest results with css compared to others libs. hollywood strings for example can sound very very good but needs alot of work tbh and for starters it might be a bit too much. for a beginner i would always recommend css, but in the end its always a matter of taste and what someone actually needs or wants.


----------



## JohnG (Mar 6, 2018)

I love CSS for solos and for a certain sound -- it's excellent. But versatility is not what I'd ascribe to it, at least today. I understand the developer may be doing some more work on either this or a subsequent string library.

I think both East West and Spitfire sound great out of the box, though I bought the "Diamond" version of EW Hollywood Strings, which I think is the one to get.

That said, there is a wonderful quality to CSS even with the vibrato that is lovely to work with.

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


----------



## JohnG (Mar 6, 2018)

Geoff Grace said:


> how well is it implemented?



The charm of this library, which is considerable, lies with the vibrato samples.

The crossfade is good effort and works reasonably well. However, there are no legato transitions for the senza vibrato samples, and the senza vib. samples also are quieter than the vib. samples. 

One result is that, if you are using a lot of portamento, while crossfading and approaching a full senza vib. sound, the portamento transitions are somewhat loud relative to the "main" notes. I don't hear the same issue with the regular legato transitions while crossfading -- they are still there and they help. It's only the portamentos that poke out. On the other hand, if you want an austere sound portamento is probably not part of it anyway, so this is probably a fussy point.

[edit: also, you can control the portamento volume using CC 5, which also could help address this]

To my ears the senza vibrato samples are not as appealing as the "regular" CSS sound, but then I (like most here I suspect) have plenty of other strings if I want senza vib.

For me, CSS is something of a specialty library; what you get is beautiful and very fast to use because it plays very musically without backtracking to fix things. And although the vibrato is quite prominent, it still sounds very musical natural and appealing. 

Even though in general I'm not a fan of vibrato these samples and the players performing them do a lovely job.


----------



## germancomponist (Mar 6, 2018)

JohnG said:


> Even though in general I'm not a fan of vibrato these samples and the players performing them do a lovely job.


+1


----------



## Geoff Grace (Mar 6, 2018)

JohnG said:


> The charm of this library, which is considerable, lies with the vibrato samples.
> 
> The crossfade is good effort and works reasonably well. However, there are no legato transitions for the senza vibrato samples, and the senza vib. samples also are quieter than the vib. samples.
> 
> ...


Thanks, *John*. That was very helpful!

Best,

Geoff


----------



## dpasdernick (Mar 6, 2018)

Haven't read the whole thread but Orchestral Tools Inspire is a good candidate. Not as deep articulation-wise but it has a great sound. Also VSL's Special Editions will get you a long way as well. I still have the Kontakt version of EW Gold Pro and do use it a lot. Sometimes it seems a bit too wet and I could look at EW Symphonic Orchestra with the separate mic positions. 

Happy Hunting!


----------



## LamaRose (Mar 6, 2018)

Ashermusic said:


> If it had true legatos, I think it would still be raved about a lot more.



Spot on. Inspiring patches and library. I plan on getting the Play version for a nominal fee, as I no longer have my Kontakt version.


----------



## LamaRose (Mar 6, 2018)

Cato, I agree with Jaap regarding your pieces... you should be fine whatever you choose. I also agree that CSS sounds like an ideal fit. If you go with CSS, the other current - and future - products come with nice discounts, so you should be within budget once everything is released. Best of fortunes to you!


----------



## Ashermusic (Mar 7, 2018)

JohnG said:


> The charm of this library, which is considerable, lies with the vibrato samples.
> 
> The crossfade is good effort and works reasonably well. However, there are no legato transitions for the senza vibrato samples, and the senza vib. samples also are quieter than the vib. samples.
> 
> ...




+1 to all of this.


----------



## khollister (Mar 7, 2018)

One thing I will mention about the Spitfire solution(s) is that I view SSS not as single string library but as part of a string system consisting of SCS, Tundra, Uist, Masse, Orchestral Swarm, Symphonic Evos, Chanber Evos & HZS. Then add in the ensemble stuff from Albion 1-3 and Hermann, LCO, the solo stuff, etc. and you have a huge palette of techniques, articulations and ensemble sizes - in most cases integrated in the acoustic of AIR. Nobody else offers that universe of string technique. 

That said, there are very few wrong answers these days - great music can be made with all of the Tier 1 libraries (and even some of the tier 2 stuff - EWQLSO for instance).


----------



## Ashermusic (Mar 7, 2018)

khollister said:


> One thing I will mention about the Spitfire solution(s) is that I view SSS not as single string library but as part of a string system consisting of SCS, Tundra, Uist, Masse, Orchestral Swarm, Symphonic Evos, Chanber Evos & HZS. Then add in the ensemble stuff from Albion 1-3 and Hermann, LCO, the solo stuff, etc. and you have a huge palette of techniques, articulations and ensemble sizes - in most cases integrated in the acoustic of AIR. Nobody else offers that universe of string technique.



And the total cost of that universe?


----------



## khollister (Mar 7, 2018)

Ashermusic said:


> And the total cost of that universe?


I know - wasn't talking cost. Hard to beat the EW stuff or CSS when on sale for the price. OT and Spitfire is more of a cost independent decision. 

For someone starting out who doesn't need exotic techniques, small sections or infinite articulations, CSS is a really great answer, especially if Alex follows up with winds & brass at similar value points.

Given I have HWS, LASS & Spitfire, it doesn't solve a problem for me personally.


----------



## maxime77 (Mar 7, 2018)

Ashermusic said:


> And the total cost of that universe?


And the total cost for Spitfire to make it?


----------



## JohnG (Mar 7, 2018)

"money is no object"

I'm continually astonished at my own (and others') ability to describe sound libraries as "expensive." Considering that anyone who is smart enough to do this even partially for a living is also smart enough to go to law or business school, work in finance or IT, or perform any number of other reliably remunerative jobs, the most expensive thing we spend on our careers is *TIME.* 

*Opportunity Cost is Real*

Given the profile of most composers, our foregone income is $75-$250k a year (at least -- for some, far more). Consequently, even if a set of libraries is $10k -- so what? If it has the chance of accelerating your career by a couple of years or even six months, such an investment is immaterial in the scheme of life.

What's a single year's tuition at law school? Nearly $50k at UCLA -- and that ignores lost earnings of tens, maybe hundreds of thousands.

*So my advice is this:*

First, meet the obligations you have to others -- children, spouse, S/O, and anyone dependent on you. 

Then figure out how to lay your hands on whatever tools will unleash your creativity and ignore the cost.

[edit: for those who are fans, I remember reading that in his salad days HZ bought a ludicrously expensive Fairlight setup that wow'd his clients. If you want to be like him, be like him.]


----------



## Geoff Grace (Mar 7, 2018)

Good points about wise investments. I suppose it's worth considering which conversation we're having: what most of us should buy or what *cato*—who started this thread—should buy. If it's the latter, then it might be helpful to consider his budget:



cato said:


> Trying to keep below $1,000, but I'm happy to invest if it's likely to last me a while. I make a living from composing so I consider it an investment.



That said, it probably would be wise for *cato* to consider *John*'s advice as well.

Best,

Geoff


----------



## Ashermusic (Mar 7, 2018)

maxime77 said:


> And the total cost for Spitfire to make it?



Not questioning whether it is worth it or not, just saying that it is not in everybody's price range


----------



## cato (Mar 7, 2018)

JohnG said:


> Then figure out how to lay your hands on whatever tools will unleash your creativity and ignore the cost.



I agree what what you're saying about investing in the right tools irrespective of cost for sure, especially if you're earning above the $75k mark. However, part of the struggle is identifying which tools those are before purchasing them.

When there are no demo versions available of a product, I do my research (like I'm doing now) to get the best understanding of what it is I genuinely need. Ironically, I often find that limiting myself to a very limited sound palette can be the best way to get the most creative results.

However, for orchestral scores, you can't really do that as the instruments you need for an orchestra are already so established (as in people expect to hear certain instruments used within an orchestra). Unless, of course, it's a more 'modern' score with sound design elements and you get to mess around with sampling objects, places and spaces.

@Geoff Grace - my budget is flexible, I'm happy to move up a notch if the instruments are going to last me (I consider it a bit like buying decent monitors)


----------



## pderbidge (Mar 7, 2018)

Ashermusic said:


> Not questioning whether it is worth it or not, just saying that it is not in everybody's price range


I agree and will add that talent will always trump expensive libraries. Ask yourself if the music you are making is as good or better than the demos that made you buy the library in the first place. If so, then maybe a switch to a more detailed library, like something from Spitfire might be worth it. I'm a big fan of the Audiobro sound. I use Lass and Symphony Series Strings all the time more than Albion One, but that's not a fair comparison since Albion One is an ensemble only library. I also have and love the sound of EW Hollywood Orchestra but just waiting til the day I do more orchestral pieces as I tend to keep Kontakt and Play away from each other. Still I can't imagine someone not getting every bit as good sound from EW as they do with Spitfire or even OT. I think they are all great but the cost value with EW is really hard to beat right now unless you absolute can't stand Play.


----------



## JohnG (Mar 7, 2018)

cato said:


> When there are no demo versions available of a product, I do my research (like I'm doing now) to get the best understanding of what it is I genuinely need.



Hi cato -- I wasn't directing my comments only (or even slightly) at you, since for all I know you're a young person starting out and don't have a big income. Or maybe ANY income.

I agree it's wise to tread carefully because you can spend a lot and have not much to show for it. But once you DO identify what you want, ask your uncle / wife / parents / whomever for the money if you don't have it. And get what you need to make the sounds you want to make.

Again, of course I don't know you and I apologise if what I wrote is inappropriate for you.

Kind regards,

John


----------



## Ashermusic (Mar 7, 2018)

pderbidge said:


> I agree and will add that talent will always trump expensive libraries. Ask yourself if the music you are making is as good or better than the demos that made you buy the library in the first place. If so, then maybe a switch to a more detailed library, like something from Spitfire might be worth it. I'm a big fan of the Audiobro sound. I use Lass and Symphony Series Strings all the time more than Albion One, but that's not a fair comparison since Albion One is an ensemble only library. I also have and love the sound of EW Hollywood Orchestra but just waiting til the day I do more orchestral pieces as I tend to keep Kontakt and Play away from each other. Still I can't imagine someone not getting every bit as good sound from EW as they do with Spitfire or even OT. I think they are all great but the cost value with EW is really hard to beat right now unless you absolute can't stand Play.




One thing our own Roberto S. has proven time and time again is that he can take pretty much any library, old or new, true legato or not, and use his ears, talent, and musicianship to find the best in it and hide the worst and make it sound great. I truly hate him


----------



## cato (Mar 7, 2018)

JohnG said:


> Again, of course I don't know you and I apologise if what I wrote is inappropriate for you.



Hi John,

No apology needed at all! I appreciate your input, all valid and useful info.

While I started learning music as a young whipper snapper, I've been earning a living from it for the last 5-6 years pretty much full time although I supplement it with some voice over work still.

I'm quite a late starter as I wasn't one of these people that knew he wanted to become a composer from the age of 2 and have experimented with a bunch of different career options. However, I clarified my 'route' when I turned 27 and now, 10 years later, I'm in a position where I can invest in the right tools (though my wife and daughter get priority as you wisely recommend).

Now you know me a little bit better  thanks again for the advice.

Cato


----------



## novaburst (Mar 8, 2018)

JohnG said:


> the most expensive thing we spend on our careers is *TIME.*



And so often it is easy to spend on a library, but find our self fighting (well me) to give the maximum time needed to create a piece.

But true words


----------



## axb312 (Sep 1, 2018)

MarcelM said:


> alex said brass and woodwinds will be released this year. not sure if he will offer as a whole package, but i guess there is a chance.



Brass and woodwinds this year?


----------

