# What is your main workhorse library?



## Akarin (Feb 24, 2020)

I was just wondering what everyone is using as a main library for strings. I keep reading that this or that lib needs to be layered and can't serve as a "main" or standalone library.

So, which one do you turn to?
Personally, even if I change or layer later in the composing process, I start with CSS.


----------



## ysnyvz (Feb 24, 2020)

Spitfire Chamber Strings


----------



## Simon Schrenk (Feb 24, 2020)

Akarin said:


> I was just wondering what everyone is using as a main library for strings. I keep reading that this or that lib needs to be layered and can't serve as a "main" or standalone library.
> 
> So, which one do you turn to?
> Personally, even if I change or layer later in the composing process, I start with CSS.


Same for me!


----------



## AdamKmusic (Feb 24, 2020)

Spitfire Studio Strings Pro!


----------



## pawelmorytko (Feb 24, 2020)

CSS as the workhorse, blended with SCS and Albion One strings only for sustains and shorts


----------



## Consona (Feb 24, 2020)

Akarin said:


> I was just wondering what everyone is using as a main library for strings. I keep reading that this or that lib needs to be layered and can't serve as a "main" or standalone library.
> 
> So, which one do you turn to?
> Personally, even if I change or layer later in the composing process, I start with CSS.


I think you'll get some misleading conclusion out of this thread. Not many people have all the string libraries and could possibly use some other as their main having it.

I use CS2 as my main, but I don't own CSS or Spitfire Chamber or Orchestral, so I can only give you my CS2 answer, but how good of an answer that is, is up to you to decide.


----------



## Bluemount Score (Feb 24, 2020)

Akarin said:


> Personally, even if I change or layer later in the composing process, I start with CSS.


This - layered with BBCSO lately and the Arks if needed


----------



## Akarin (Feb 24, 2020)

Consona said:


> I think you'll get some misleading conclusion out of this thread. Not many people have all the string libraries and could possibly use some other as their main having it.
> 
> I use CS2 as my main, but I don't own CSS or Spitfire Chamber or Orchestral, so I can only give you my CS2 answer, but how good of an answer that is, is up to you to decide.



Well, if you work mainly with CS2, I guess that it is because it works for you as a main library  That's what I want to know.


----------



## Consona (Feb 24, 2020)

Akarin said:


> Well, if you work mainly with CS2, I guess that it is because it works for you as a main library  That's what I want to know.


What if I had CSS and wouldn't use CS2 anymore?


----------



## Casiquire (Feb 24, 2020)

Depending on the size of the ensemble needed, either LASS or Dimension Strings. Often both


----------



## sIR dORT (Feb 24, 2020)

Hollywood Strings. It truly is a workhorse lib but if you're willing to be patient and work to get the most out of it, it can sound lights out.


----------



## Akarin (Feb 24, 2020)

Casiquire said:


> Depending on the size of the ensemble needed, either LASS or Dimension Strings. Often both



Interesting. Dimension is the one library that I don't have.


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (Feb 24, 2020)

Akarin said:


> Personally, even if I change or layer later in the composing process, I start with CSS.


CSS for me as well.


----------



## BenG (Feb 24, 2020)

Used to be Hollywood Strings before getting CSS. Lately, been going with a combo of the two!


----------



## zimm83 (Feb 24, 2020)

Ark1-2-3-4 with Berlin first chairs. All different sort of strings, but fantastic.


----------



## Lassi Tani (Feb 24, 2020)

Berlin Strings for me. Nice and tidy in my VEP template.


----------



## I like music (Feb 24, 2020)

sIR dORT said:


> Hollywood Strings. It truly is a workhorse lib but if you're willing to be patient and work to get the most out of it, it can sound lights out.



I have a measley little computer, but I added HWS back into my template. Right now, I just use the powerful sustain patches with simulated legato (to save on RAM) and find that they can be absolutely smashing/wonderful. One of the best sounding libraries ever made.


----------



## Gerbil (Feb 24, 2020)

I use a mix of different libraries, but on the whole I'd say CSS (with CSSS) sees the most action of late with Century Strings for Sordinos. 

I resisted using CSS as the core of it all for a while as it seemed that everybody else used it and I didn't like the workflow. But the fact is that it's so consistent in use and effective that I caved in the end. You don't really need to mess around with it mix wise. Just play and you're done. Same with CSB (and CS2 for that matter). I wish all libraries were as easy to use.


----------



## Symfoniq (Feb 24, 2020)

CSS and Afflatus.


----------



## Alex Fraser (Feb 24, 2020)

Spitfire Studio Strings. Not the last word in playability or champion legato, but there are so many different textures and articulations to be enjoyed. More so with the pro version.



Akarin said:


> I keep reading that this or that lib needs to be layered and can't serve as a "main" or standalone library.


Layering is always optional, never compulsory. Another example of "internet wisdom." Don't overthink it.


----------



## ChrisSiuMusic (Feb 24, 2020)

CSS and Berlin for me. The amount of CSS in replies here truly speaks volumes about the library.


----------



## InLight-Tone (Feb 24, 2020)

Century Strings/Sordino/Ostinato, layered with all sorts of Spitfire like SSS for depth but I'm doing more aggressive music...


----------



## M Abela (Feb 24, 2020)

Akarin said:


> I was just wondering what everyone is using as a main library for strings. I keep reading that this or that lib needs to be layered and can't serve as a "main" or standalone library.
> 
> So, which one do you turn to?
> Personally, even if I change or layer later in the composing process, I start with CSS.



CSS (impressive 'dark' detail, most impressive legatos of any string library currently on the market). Blended with MA1 (for sheer power) / HZS (for texture and 'breath') when needed.


----------



## jbuhler (Feb 24, 2020)

SCS. SSS or HZS added if I need more heft.


----------



## jononotbono (Feb 24, 2020)

I don’t regard any of the libraries people have listed as “Workhorse”. Berlin Orchestra? Spitfire Symphonic Orchestra? These are two of the best commercially available.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Feb 24, 2020)

HS Gold and BBCSO


----------



## Bluemount Score (Feb 24, 2020)

ChrisSiuMusic said:


> CSS and Berlin for me. The amount of CSS in replies here truly speaks volumes about the library.


I wonder how it would be if CSS would be priced at, let's say $799


----------



## Mike Fox (Feb 24, 2020)

Bluemount Score said:


> I wonder how it would be if CSS would be priced at, let's say $799


Not nearly as many people would own it at that price, but I'm sure some people would still be willing to spend that much on it.


----------



## Bluemount Score (Feb 24, 2020)

Mike Fox said:


> Not nearly as many people would own it at that price, but I'm sure some people would still be willing to spend that much on it.


I think so too - really not sure if I would have payed that price...


----------



## jononotbono (Feb 24, 2020)

Mike Fox said:


> Not nearly as many people would own it at that price, but I'm sure some people would still be willing to spend that much on it.



Well, when you compare it to other libraries with masses of more articulations and mic positions I’m not sure people would be happy about. Going off prices from other Devs. I own CSS and love it but it is nowhere near as comprehensive as, for example, Spitfire Chamber Strings. Hard to compare I know as they both have their strengths.


----------



## Mike Fox (Feb 24, 2020)

Bluemount Score said:


> I think so too - really not sure if I would have payed that price...


I certainly wouldn't. Then again, it's not really my cup of tea.


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (Feb 24, 2020)

Bluemount Score said:


> I wonder how it would be if CSS would be priced at, let's say $799


An excellent point. I'm not sure if I would have bought it for double the price back when I was strings shopping. Maybe.

But now that I actually own it, it's my most-used library by far. If I could only have one sample library, it would be CSS.


----------



## Mike Fox (Feb 24, 2020)

jononotbono said:


> Well, when you compare it to other libraries with masses of more articulations and mic positions I’m not sure people would be happy about. Going off prices from other Devs. I own CSS and love it but it is nowhere near as comprehensive as, for example, Spitfire Chamber Strings. Hard to compare I know as they both have their strengths.


For some people, there's a lot more to a string library than just a wealth of articulations and mic positions.


----------



## Symfoniq (Feb 24, 2020)

jononotbono said:


> I don’t regard any of the libraries people have listed as “Workhorse”. Berlin Orchestra? Spitfire Symphonic Orchestra? These are two of the best commercially available.



I own SSO. I still reach for CSS far more often. Therefore, CSS is my workhorse.


----------



## jononotbono (Feb 24, 2020)

Symfoniq said:


> I own SSO. I still reach for CSS far more often. Therefore, CSS is my workhorse.



Workhorse is a word used to describe something that is just average, gets the job done. No thrills. I don’t regard CSS to be a work horse. Its an Arabian Stallion of the Horse world.

Still, there are people that call VIs “VSTs” which is just incorrect so whatever works for people I guess.


----------



## jononotbono (Feb 24, 2020)

Mike Fox said:


> For some people, there's a lot more to a string library than just a wealth of articulations and mic positions.



And I was hoping that my last sentence wouldn’t be misunderstood. Thanks.


----------



## muk (Feb 24, 2020)

It depends on the music I am mocking up. For romantic music/film music it's CSS without a doubt. For classical music Light & Sound Chamber Strings. For TV music it used to be Dimension Strings until I sold them. Now it will probably be Light & Sound, Sable, or maybe Hollywood Strings Gold. For short notes I am pretty fond of the string sections I created by stacking several instances of Berlin Strings First Chairs.


----------



## Mike Fox (Feb 24, 2020)

jononotbono said:


> And I was hoping that my last sentence wouldn’t be misunderstood. Thanks.



I actually thought i was elaborating on it.


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (Feb 24, 2020)

CSS really changed the way I think about programming samples.

When I hear music and I have to break it down into individual articulations and think about the specific parameters I'll need to tweak, I think in terms of how CSS tackles things. In my brain, it's just a clearer and more well-defined system than anything else I've used. Things like dialing in the attack, the transitions speed, how I draw my cc curves, how I sequence my shorts and accents.

I actually mod my other libraries to try to get them to behave more like CSS because it's the system I click with the most. It's dependable, it's flexible, it's simple.

I also trust it to be balanced more than any other strings library I own. If CSS tells me that, say, pizzicato sounds a certain volume in a mix, I tend to trust it and tweak other libraries or other aspects of the writing first.

On paper, if you list CSS's features it doesn't have things like sul g, playable glissando, flautando, sure. But what it does have is the articulations I use 95% of the time. And they are programmed in a way that just makes the most sense in my brain.


----------



## Mike Fox (Feb 24, 2020)

Land of Missing Parts said:


> CSS really changed the way I think about programming samples.
> 
> When I hear music and I have to break it down into individual articulations and think about the specific parameters I'll need to tweak, I think in terms of how CSS tackles things. In my brain, it's just a clearer and more well-defined system than anything else I've used. Things like dialing in the attack, the transitions speed, how I draw my cc curves, how I sequence my shorts and accents.
> 
> ...


Great post!

I've heard your mockups before, and they're outstanding. Black Beauty was definitely impressive! Did you use CSS for that?


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (Feb 24, 2020)

Mike Fox said:


> Great post!
> 
> I've heard your mockups before, and they're outstanding. Black Beauty was definitely impressive! Did you use CSS for that?


Thanks Mike. Yes, Black Beauty was all CSS.

Here's something I did with CSS (and Ark 1 for tutti strings) that I think illustrates what I mean about the programming aspect of CSS. There's a lot of different things that strings need to be able to do here, yet they are all just the basic building blocks of CSS, just tweaked in different ways.


----------



## Mike Fox (Feb 24, 2020)

Land of Missing Parts said:


> Thanks Mike. Yes, Black Beauty was all CSS.
> 
> Here's something I did with CSS (and Ark 1 for tutti strings) that I think illustrates what I mean about the programming aspect of CSS. There's a lot of different things that strings need to be able to do here, yet they are all just the basic building blocks of CSS, just tweaked in different ways.



Damn, that's good!

I seem to love CSS when i hear others play it, but it's a different story when I'm behind the wheel.

Same with Fender strats for that matter, lol!


----------



## Symfoniq (Feb 24, 2020)

jononotbono said:


> Workhorse is a word used to describe something that is just average, gets the job done. No thrills. I don’t regard CSS to be a work horse. Its an Arabian Stallion of the Horse world.
> 
> Still, there are people that call VIs “VSTs” which is just incorrect so whatever works for people I guess.



I don't know which side of the pond you reside on, but there may be cultural differences at play here. In the United States, the Merriam-Webster dictionary says definitions for "workhorse" include:


something that is markedly useful, durable, or dependable
a person who performs most of the work of a group task
CSS meets both definitions for me.

I agree with you, though, that CSS is the stallion of workhorses.


----------



## Gingerbread (Feb 24, 2020)

Land of Missing Parts said:


> CSS really changed the way I think about programming samples.
> 
> When I hear music and I have to break it down into individual articulations and think about the specific parameters I'll need to tweak, I think in terms of how CSS tackles things. In my brain, it's just a clearer and more well-defined system than anything else I've used. Things like dialing in the attack, the transitions speed, how I draw my cc curves, how I sequence my shorts and accents.
> 
> ...


If you would be willing, I'd love to learn some of your insights, or interesting methods you've discovered to get the most out of CSS.


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (Feb 24, 2020)

Mike Fox said:


> I seem to love CSS when i hear others play it, but it's a different story when I'm behind the wheel.


From what you've posted, it seems you mostly don't click with the tone. And I think that's a fair criticism of CSS; I think the tone is just a matter of taste.

The only thing I'd add on that point is that I'm mostly listening to concert recordings and Williams scores at the moment--the idea being that I'm focusing on the kind of acoustic sound you'd get in a live room with minimal processing and no overdubs, as I am trying to teach myself to use samples to sound more like that. (Also, just a matter of taste. There' nothing wrong with modern sounds that go beyond what can be played live in a concert hall .) And in that respect, I believe CSS sounds natural and like how I'd expect strings to sound.

But for me, the tone isn't the main attraction. It's the programmability that draws me to CSS, and tone is secondary for me.


----------



## jononotbono (Feb 24, 2020)

Symfoniq said:


> I don't know which side of the pond you reside on, but there may be cultural differences at play here. In the United States, the Merriam-Webster dictionary says definitions for "workhorse" include:
> 
> 
> something that is markedly useful, durable, or dependable
> ...



None of this matters. Let’s just keep calling stuff whatever we want. I shouldn’t have commented.


----------



## JohnG (Feb 24, 2020)

jononotbono said:


> I shouldn’t have commented.



You fool!!!!


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (Feb 24, 2020)

Gingerbread said:


> If you would be willing, I'd love to learn some of your insights, or interesting methods you've discovered to get the most out of CSS.


Sure, I'll try to post something in a bit. Gotta do some work at the moment.


----------



## AEF (Feb 24, 2020)

Land of Missing Parts said:


> Sure, I'll try to post something in a bit. Gotta do some work at the moment.



Some people seem to have almost a kinship with certain libraries, and CSS is so clearly your soul mate. Love hearing what you do with that library! do you use the main mix mic? convolution reverbs on top?


----------



## jononotbono (Feb 24, 2020)

JohnG said:


> You fool!!!!




You’ve forced me out of commentary retirement. There is something important I need to get off my chest about this whole matter...

HORSES ARE SHIT.


----------



## JohnG (Feb 24, 2020)

We can always count on you for the statesman-like response, @jononotbono


----------



## Mike Fox (Feb 25, 2020)

Land of Missing Parts said:


> From what you've posted, it seems you mostly don't click with the tone. And I think that's a fair criticism of CSS; I think the tone is just a matter of taste.


It's definitely a combination of not liking the tone, as well as the room the strings were recorded in. I'm also not a fan of the playability, and that all of the articulations are loaded up in the same patch. I guess i could always make my own presets/multis.

Maybe i need to spend some more time with CSS, and i'll eventually warm up to it, because i REALLY want to like this library!

Btw, i do like the shorts quite a bit.


----------



## InLight-Tone (Feb 25, 2020)

I don't like the tone of CSS either, way too dark and dated sounding to me. Then again I can hardly listen to classical music recordings for the same reason. Guess I've indulged in too much hybrid and trailer music...


----------



## jonathanparham (Feb 25, 2020)

AdamKmusic said:


> Spitfire Studio Strings Pro!


Same here. The different-sized sections are really helpful for my writing.


----------



## Akarin (Feb 25, 2020)

Mike Fox said:


> It's definitely a combination of not liking the tone, as well as the room the strings were recorded in. I'm also not a fan of the playability, and that all of the articulations are loaded up in the same patch. I guess i could always make my own presets/multis.
> 
> Maybe i need to spend some more time with CSS, and i'll eventually warm up to it, because i REALLY want to like this library!
> 
> Btw, i do like the shorts quite a bit.



A quick tip: you can unload unused articulations by option(or alt) clicking them. I do that to separate the shorts from the longs.


----------



## Mike Fox (Feb 25, 2020)

Akarin said:


> A quick tip: you can unload unused articulations by option(or alt) clicking them. I do that to separate the shorts from the longs.


For sure. Just wish i didn't have to, ya know?


----------



## Akarin (Feb 25, 2020)

Mike Fox said:


> For sure. Just wish i didn't have to, ya know?



Ha, yes. Totally understand. Even if I prefer it this way, rather than something like Afflatus that doesn't have keyswitches and where I need to build my own multis for each section.


----------



## musicalweather (Feb 25, 2020)

Berlin Main. CS2 if I need a smoother, less detailed sound.


----------



## darcvision (Feb 27, 2020)

muk said:


> It depends on the music I am mocking up. For romantic music/film music it's CSS without a doubt. For classical music Light & Sound Chamber Strings. For TV music it used to be Dimension Strings until I sold them. Now it will probably be Light & Sound, Sable, or maybe Hollywood Strings Gold. For short notes I am pretty fond of the string sections I created by stacking several instances of Berlin Strings First Chairs.


i have this library too, sounds pretty good. any tips how to manage mic volume (ex like decca + bleed + close) to make sounds better or unique. also if you share your music with LSCS library would be great idea.


----------



## muk (Feb 27, 2020)

stefandy31 said:


> any tips how to manage mic volume (ex like decca + bleed + close) to make sounds better or unique. also if you share your music with LSCS library would be great idea.



Hi,

sure, no problem. Here is the most recent version of a track I made to tweak my Light & Sound template:









Elgar Serenade Larghetto mockup.mp3 | Powered by Box







app.box.com







Here is a thread about it, including the recording I used for reference:






Concertgebouw Kamerorkest - a gorgeous strings sound


****Edit February 2022********************************** added two new versions. First one with Sonokinetic Orchestral Strings: Apart from the obvious tuning issue, I like this version. It has depth, and a natural concert strings sound. The tuning issue should get corrected with the next...




vi-control.net





(Sorry for the noise, by the way. I've overdone it with the room tone, should have reduced that quite a bit.)

My mic mix looks like this:







XY are muted, the close mics are at -2.3db. That's my starting point. It's well worth experimenting with the mic settings. Even though the library was recorded in a comparably small studio, the various mic positions do sound different. Adjust to taste, depending on the project.

I added a bit of reverb on top. I used the old WizooVerb in this case, with a tail length of around 2 seconds. I don't remember the dry/wet levels. But it's nothing scientific, I simply dialed it in by ear to find a setting I like.

Hope this helps. If you have more questions just ask away.


----------



## Symfoniq (Feb 27, 2020)

jononotbono said:


> None of this matters. Let’s just keep calling stuff whatever we want. I shouldn’t have commented.



My apologies if I offended. It was not my intention.


----------



## jononotbono (Feb 27, 2020)

Symfoniq said:


> My apologies if I offended. It was not my intention.



You didn't offend in the slightest.


----------



## Hendrixon (Feb 27, 2020)

Regarding CSS, for those who have issues with the sound, well its the room mic (or the room it self) that gives most of the timbre in the "mix mic" and dominates with mid pushed tone.

Just make your own multi using the close and mid mics, no room mic at all (use any nice reverb for taste in stead)
You'll think you're hearing a library from Spitfire or OT.


----------



## Cinebient (Feb 27, 2020)

I saw here so much CSS mentioned. Since i still don‘t get all the similar acronyms (that is really a terrible thing here).
What is CSS 
(I would bet Cinematic Studio Strings but not sure by all this acronyms here all around).


----------



## darcvision (Feb 27, 2020)

muk said:


> Hi,
> 
> sure, no problem. Here is the most recent version of a track I made to tweak my Light & Sound template:
> 
> ...



another question
1. what's the point using room tone? is it necessary? 
2. how do you use split feature? do you automate it? actually i'm not sure what it is even i already read manual and i think only this library has split feature
3. do you pan your mic?
sorry english isn't my native
thanks for your answer


----------



## sathyva (Feb 27, 2020)

CSS but a bit of PITA regarding the delays with legato modes...
But beautiful sound anyway.
I also love the Strezov Sampling Afflatus Strings.


----------



## Hendrixon (Feb 29, 2020)

stefandy31 said:


> another question
> 1. what's the point using room tone? is it necessary?



There is a reason we have tons of reverb plugins and outboard processors in the world... ppl love spaces 
With that said, no artificial reverb (algorithmic, convolution, spring, plate) can rival real (good!) room sound.
Any pro sample library usually captures the sound in several distances, from as close as possible to as far as possible, letting you mix the sound "where" you want - or need - it "in space".

Need it more intimate or in your face? use less room bleed.
Want it epic and immersive? use ton of room bleed.

I'm also a drummer using VDrums, there is a trick I use with drum libraries where I'll use the close mics from one library (cause I love that drum set) and the room mics from a different library (cause the studio ambiance there is sublime).
With drums its easy to mix like that since the close mic is pretty much on the skin, giving you totally dry sound. you can't really do that with orchestra instruments since the close mics are not really that close to the instruments and you always have some level of room bleed.

In short: real room > artificial reverb


----------



## X-Bassist (Feb 29, 2020)

Hendrixon said:


> In short: real room > artificial reverb



Not really. A GOOD or GREAT room is USUALLY better than artificial. It’s a good place to start. It adds ambience and space around the instrument, giving you a feel for being in the room. But if the room sounds weird or has strange resonances then no, real room does not beat a good artificial reverb, in the right hands. An artificial reverb can also give an impression of space, but it can also give you good resonances, musical enhancement that can be benificial to making the instruments “sing” a little more and be more pleasing than it is on it’s own, even with a good room.

Even if you use good room mics, you should be experimenting with adding GOOD artificial reverb on anything that isn’t a traditional classical piece. Most people suggest mixing a convolution reverb with an algo reverb, but I would suggest taking it further. Like with strings, try finding 3 or 4 seperate reverbs you like, tweak them individually, then mix them all in. With a decent amount of practice you can find the sweet spot where it sweetens the mix greatly but you don’t notice the reverb or hear any one reverb ring out too predominately. Balance that with the room mics and you have a secret sauce.

It does have to be tweaked for each song depending on arrangement and if there is a vocal, but I’ve found adding a decent eq after each reverb and taking out some highs or a ringing frequency makes it sit very nicely. I still start with the mics, and sometimes go with just close and room mics, but when I need a little more, or the mix gets more involved (as it does on a film mix) the secret sauce comes in very handy.


----------



## ProfoundSilence (Feb 29, 2020)

Berlin


----------



## Casiquire (Feb 29, 2020)

Cinebient said:


> I saw here so much CSS mentioned. Since i still don‘t get all the similar acronyms (that is really a terrible thing here).
> What is CSS
> (I would bet Cinematic Studio Strings but not sure by all this acronyms here all around).



Your guess is correct!


----------



## holywilly (Feb 29, 2020)

VSL and BBC


----------



## TomislavEP (Mar 1, 2020)

Albion Legacy for most purposes, Loegria for more intimate applications and Tundra for everything else. I also have Adagietto, Session Strings 2, Arctic Strings plus several other solo and ensemble libraries but I don't use them as often.

Personally, I don't layer strings from several different libraries but tend to stick with one source per project for my own work.


----------



## Gerbil (Mar 1, 2020)

X-Bassist said:


> Like with strings, try finding 3 or 4 seperate reverbs you like, tweak them individually, then mix them all in. With a decent amount of practice you can find the sweet spot where it sweetens the mix greatly but you don’t notice the reverb or hear any one reverb ring out too predominately.


3 or 4? Do you have an example of this in action? I only ask as I rarely use more than one or two at most.


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Mar 1, 2020)

Bluemount Score said:


> I wonder how it would be if CSS would be priced at, let's say $799



Don't think that this thought experiment makes sense. It would be clearly overpriced at $799. It's a library that's absolutely great at what it does, and it's priced very fairly.


----------



## Bluemount Score (Mar 1, 2020)

Jimmy Hellfire said:


> Don't think that this thought experiment makes sense. It would be clearly overpriced at $799. It's a library that's absolutely great at what it does, and it's priced very fairly.


Fair enough, but I've heard quite a few people here say the opposite and that it's underpriced by a decent amount.


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Mar 1, 2020)

Bluemount Score said:


> Fair enough, but I've heard quite a few people here say the opposite and that it's underpriced by a decent amount.



That's interesting. Perhaps in the sense that it's a top notch quality library that doesn't need to shy away from comparisons with the other top dogs, but is more competitively priced than most of them.

I think CSS really hits the sweet spot. CSS does away with all the esoteric and effects stuff (Spitfire) and focuses on the core features. It doesn't have the excessive dynamic range of Synchron Strings, but offers just enough to be both expressive as well as easy to work with, and while it doesn't offer the wealth of articulations Berlin Strings does, it comes with all the important articulations in stellar quality. Of course it doesn't come with all those different section sizes and styles like Afflatus, but simply focuses on one universally useful characteristic - delivering a good, versatile, both tight and punchy as well as expressive and lush medium sized ensemble sound.

So they kind of cut the right corners while providing everything you really need - great sound, all the bread and butter articulations, all the mic positions that make the most sense, along with a stereo mix, and very straight forward and simple usability. Perfect.

And that's what really makes it the definition of a workhorse library. For what it does, I think it's priced absolutely correctly and I'm sure that's another factor for its huge success. Personally I don't think it's underpriced. If it cost more, it would have to bring something to the table that the aforementioned do. But I'm not sure it would even be the right thing to do. I think a lot of CSS' popularity also has to do with the fact that it's not overbearing and not very complex.


----------



## GtrString (Mar 1, 2020)

Something from the ProjectSam Symphobias. Still first choice here..


----------



## SamC (Mar 1, 2020)

I’ve been a Hollywood Strings guy for quite a while. CCS has great high legatos but for shorts I go to spitfire.

I really found that to achieve what I want I can’t really rely on any one string library. They all offer something different in so many ways.


----------



## muk (Mar 1, 2020)

stefandy31 said:


> another question
> 1. what's the point using room tone? is it necessary?
> 2. how do you use split feature? do you automate it? actually i'm not sure what it is even i already read manual and i think only this library has split feature
> 3. do you pan your mic?
> ...



1. It's gimmicky, absolutely not necessary. Live recordings do have a noise floor, and various sounds like people coughing, chair crackling and such. In sample libraries there are ideally no such noises. Adding a room tone adds these noises in. It's a somewhat cheesy thing to do, as recording engineers fight hard to minimize these noises as much as possible.

2. the split fader adjusts at which point the next velocity layer kicks in. Let's say that at the standard setting the piano layer is triggered with cc1 values ranging from 0 to 40 (I don't know the real numbers, I just made that up as an example). At cc1 = 41 the forte layer kicks in. If you increase the split fader, the piano layer will be triggered by cc1 values ranging from 0 to 60, for example. Thus the forte layer kicks in at higher values.

3. I do pan the close mic/close ribbon mic only. These are mono mics, so the signal does not include any natural panning. The other mics captured the groups in their natural seating position, so I don't add any panning to those.

Hope this helps.


----------



## Ashermusic (Mar 1, 2020)

Bluemount Score said:


> Fair enough, but I've heard quite a few people here say the opposite and that it's underpriced by a decent amount.



There is no such thing as an underpriced library. The developer knows how much time and expense they have invested so if they are happy with the the return, by definition the library is not underpriced.

But”a good value” may be accurate.


----------



## X-Bassist (Mar 2, 2020)

Gerbil said:


> 3 or 4? Do you have an example of this in action? I only ask as I rarely use more than one or two at most.


I can put together an example (all my work is for clients so I can’t post it here), but to be clear, this is combining long reverbs (halls) with some shorter ER’s or chambers. The longer verbs give you ring out that emphasize certain tones, while shorter gives you space around the instruments. Mix up convolutions with algo reverbs and you quickly get to 4 or 6 different verbs. This is why I collect verbs like I collect strings. Some I consider gems:

Strings: CineStings(mix the mics), SCS, CSS, CS2, Con Moto, Adagio Sordino
Solo Strings: Cinestrings Solo(again mics!), Chris Hein Solo, Tina Guo
Brass: CSB, CineBrass, Sonore, Caspian, Sample Modeling Trumpet v3, Swam Saxes, Blue Street Brass (inexpensive and warm, old school)
Woodwinds: Berlin WW Solo Expansions, Cinewinds, IS Ventus (ethnic)
Percussion: CinePerc, Cinematic Rhythms, Taiko Creator, Strikeforce

Reverbs: Lexicon PCM reverb bundle, Altiverb, Comet, Goldplate, Blackhole, SP2016, Pro-R, LX480, Adaptiverb (special), Polaris (shimmer), Protoverb (free). Some honorable mentions: VSS3, QL Spaces, H-Verb, R2, Abbey Road Chambers and plates. The list goes on. 

All this said I was just looking at one template today that only needed one simple reverb (and a 2nd instance for surround with longer settings) and it’s good. The instrument and the room mics can really inform you on how much is needed, and it can change depending on arrangement and density of the mix. But like with many other fx, leaving time for experimenting can be very educational.


----------



## Gil (Mar 2, 2020)

holywilly said:


> VSL and BBC


Hello holywilly, as an owner of VSL instruments (Cuben SE, Synchronized, MirX, VE Suite, ...), I'll be interested if you can please elaborate on what kind of VSL instruments you have and why you added BBCSO to your VI personal library?
Thanks!


----------



## holywilly (Mar 2, 2020)

VSL and BBC


Gil said:


> Hello holywilly, as an owner of VSL instruments (Cuben SE, Synchronized, MirX, VE Suite, ...), I'll be interested if you can please elaborate on what kind of VSL instruments you have and why you added BBCSO to your VI personal library?
> Thanks!



My template as follow:
Woodwinds: 
VSL VI woodwinds full (MIR roompack Synchron Stage)

Brass: 
VSL synchronized Dimension Brass I
BBC Brass
JXL Brass

Percussions: 
BBC Percussions + Spitfire Percussions

Strings:
VSL synchronized Dimension Strings I & III
VSL VI chamber, orchestral apparionata (MIR Synchron Stage)
VSL Synchron Strings I
BBC Strings 

Somehow I like how BBC and Synchron blend very well together. For Synchron instruments, I set them up pretty dry, and tweak BBC more wet to create some depth.

unfortunately I cannot post any of my film scoring mockup at the moment due to copyright, combining both libraries yield a quite convincing mockup!


----------



## Jacob Cadmus (Mar 3, 2020)

Adventure + Soaring Strings bundle. Not an obvious choice for bread and butter, but they work for me.


----------



## cloudbuster (Mar 3, 2020)

Depends on the music but my 'desert island' string library would be HS Gold, without a doubt. Looking forward to upgrading it to Diamond during the next sale.


----------



## fredmbarros (Mar 4, 2020)

Hendrixon said:


> Regarding CSS, for those who have issues with the sound, well its the room mic (or the room it self) that gives most of the timbre in the "mix mic" and dominates with mid pushed tone.
> 
> Just make your own multi using the close and mid mics, no room mic at all (use any nice reverb for taste in stead)
> You'll think you're hearing a library from Spitfire or OT.



Not that I’m doubting your statement, but I’d like to see a demonstration of it. I’m on the fence about getting CSS to be my only library (at least while resources are short for me) to use mostly for classical music, but even though many people vouch for them also for this kind of music, I tend not see what’s to like in this regard by the demos I’ve checked. This makes me think there’s a difference in what I and you guys value and pay attention to in a library. Since I’m the inexperienced one, being able to comment and discuss it here would help me a lot in choosing which library to get. The other ones I’m looking at are Berlin (sounds good so far, waiting for their edu sale in September), SStS (great sound, but seems to have technical problems), SCS (great sound, thoigh more cinematic and expensive) and VSL (which many people praise but whose sound doesn’t convince me at all, not even in their own demos, so I’m going more with what people say than my own ears).


----------



## Saxer (Mar 4, 2020)

Strings - Dimension Strings
Brass - Samplemodeling
Woodwinds - no real happy workhorse yet. VSL, Audiomodeling, others...
Drums Sets - Superior3
Bass - Trilian (Mojo, Scarbee)
Pianos - Pianoteq, Imperfect
Guitars - Realguitar (ease of use), Orangetree, Efimov
Synths - Omnisphere, all U-He

This all works if I have to finish stuff. Everything else for playing around or trying different colors.


----------



## camelot (Mar 4, 2020)

Out of CS2, CSS, L&S Chamber, SSS, SCS, ARK1, Adagietto, VSL Appasionata, Soaring Strings, Adventure Strings (Solo & First Chairs not included in the list), I use CS2 in combination with CSS as my absolute string workhorse. I made them both sounding more alike, so I can use them in the same project without further ado. Sometimes CSS as divisi for CS2. I am not the string layering kindaguy.

I rarely use any of the other libs. It is really a let down to see the list of all the string libs I bought and thinking about how rarely I used them. I might even have forgotten one.


----------



## DS_Joost (Mar 4, 2020)

Hollywood Orchestra. Everytime I try to replace it (because of old fashioned workflow) I return to it and find that I am still in love with that sound. Nothing can replace it, and it can really, really do everything I throw at it.

Come to think of it, I would pay for an update of it (keyswitches, slimmer size, sleeker patch organisation, Woodwind sections, modwheel controllable percussion swells). If they did that I would still be using it 20 years from now!


----------



## jbuhler (Mar 4, 2020)

DS_Joost said:


> Hollywood Orchestra. Everytime I try to replace it (because of old fashioned workflow) I return to it and find that I am still in love with that sound. Nothing can replace it, and it can really, really do everything I throw at it.
> 
> Come to think of it, I would pay for an update of it (keyswitches, slimmer size, sleeker patch organisation, Woodwind sections, modwheel controllable percussion swells). If they did that I would still be using it 20 years from now!


It's kind of weird that they've concluded that they'd rather sell the library for $99 than invest in updating the organization and programming.


----------



## Kery Michael (Mar 4, 2020)

Hollywood Orchestra for me. I don't have any of the others, e.g. OT and Spitfire... But once I learned how to work with all the articulations, I'm happy with it.


----------



## PaulieDC (Mar 5, 2020)

Bluemount Score said:


> I wonder how it would be if CSS would be priced at, let's say $799


There's a thought. In Nov 2018, OT had a 40% sale on the Berlin Biggies, plus I had a $100 voucher from buying Inspire. I landed Berlin Strings and Brass for $449 and $429 respectively... sooooo, does that change the CSS dynamic? (short answer: nahhhhh, I don't have the composition talent of the majority of members to make a difference, lol). Longer answer, or question really: if CSS and BS were the same price, how many would have Berlin instead of CSS?


----------



## PaulieDC (Mar 5, 2020)

Cinebient said:


> ...i still don‘t get all the similar acronyms (that is really a terrible thing here).
> What is CSS ...


Whew, I thought it was just me. I really work to keep up with "I started with LASS but it's like VSL where it's just too dry although I like the legs, so I'm working with SCS (afterwards I might jump to SSS) but then I've heard awesome stuff that in CSS and CSSS so I'm kind of undecided right now especially since CS2 is currently on sale... but what if OT puts BS and BB on sale? I'd even go for BWW although I like the room used for SSW and they do more wish list sales. Maybe I should just go for BBCSO since you get the whole package, although there are missing arts, because I did like the full range of instruments I got when I used EWSO... speaking of, maybe the CCX subscription is better, I'll get EWHO and EWHC in Diam... wait, Platinum edition... ah, crikey, I forgot about CH libraries, and then I have to wonder if VEP is equally compatible since I'm only on 4 and I think it's 7 now but licenses dropped from 3 to 1 so maybe I can ditch VEP and get an i9 CPU with NVMe drives for SCS and SSS and LASS and CSS and EWHO and..."

Maddening.

Three final thoughts:

Why do some folks still call Hollywood Strings "Quantum Leap"?
Does "EastWest Gold" mean Symphonic or Hollywood? Guy Michelmore still calls it that, whatever *it* is... and that may be a reference to the old Kontakt version AFAIK.
If SSS is Spitfire Symphonic Strings, then what's the acronym for Spitfire Studio Strings?
Whew... sorry, went seriously OT from the OP. Back to CSS!


----------



## Akarin (Mar 5, 2020)

PaulieDC said:


> If SSS is Spitfire Symphonic Strings, then what's the acronym for Spitfire Studio Strings?



This one I know! SStS!


----------



## angeruroth (Mar 5, 2020)

PaulieDC said:


> Does "EastWest Gold" mean Symphonic or Hollywood? Guy Michelmore still calls it that, whatever *it* is... and that may be a reference to the old Kontakt version AFAIK.
> If SSS is Spitfire Symphonic Strings, then what's the acronym for Spitfire Studio Strings?


AFAIK:
- Symphonic.
- SStS.


----------



## PaulieDC (Mar 5, 2020)

angeruroth said:


> AFAIK:
> - Symphonic.
> - SStS.





Akarin said:


> This one I know! SStS!


Thanks!!


----------



## Geoff Grace (Mar 6, 2020)

When in doubt, you can always refer to this thread:

Glossary of VI-C Abbreviations

Best,

Geoff


----------



## Ashermusic (Mar 6, 2020)

If I had to choose only one, yeah, it’s still the Hollywood Orchestra. It is just so versatile.


----------



## Cinebient (Mar 7, 2020)

PaulieDC said:


> Whew, I thought it was just me. I really work to keep up with "I started with LASS but it's like VSL where it's just too dry although I like the legs, so I'm working with SCS (afterwards I might jump to SSS) but then I've heard awesome stuff that in CSS and CSSS so I'm kind of undecided right now especially since CS2 is currently on sale... but what if OT puts BS and BB on sale? I'd even go for BWW although I like the room used for SSW and they do more wish list sales. Maybe I should just go for BBCSO since you get the whole package, although there are missing arts, because I did like the full range of instruments I got when I used EWSO... speaking of, maybe the CCX subscription is better, I'll get EWHO and EWHC in Diam... wait, Platinum edition... ah, crikey, I forgot about CH libraries, and then I have to wonder if VEP is equally compatible since I'm only on 4 and I think it's 7 now but licenses dropped from 3 to 1 so maybe I can ditch VEP and get an i9 CPU with NVMe drives for SCS and SSS and LASS and CSS and EWHO and..."
> 
> Maddening.
> 
> ...



I just wish people would take the few seconds extra time to just write the words (oh i´m guilty as well sometimes of course) instead of the acronyms. Or at least add a link with a legend with all acronyms here used. 
Otherwise idnkwtdawphm.....


----------



## Geoff Grace (Mar 7, 2020)

Cinebient said:


> I just wish people would take the few seconds extra time to just write the words (oh i´m guilty as well sometimes of course) instead of the acronyms. Or at least add a link with a legend with all acronyms here used.
> Otherwise idnkwtdawphm.....


If a thread is about multiple products, I try to follow the follow the journalistic practice of beginning with the full name the first time I use it in a post and following with the acronym. For example:

"I bought Spitfire Chamber Strings (SCS) on sale a few years ago; and ever since then, SCS has been one of the top string libraries I turn to when scoring for screen."

Best,

Geoff


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (Mar 7, 2020)

Cinebient said:


> Or at least add a link with a legend with all acronyms here used.


Or at least, suppose there was a box where you can type in the acronym you don't know and it will find other forum posts with examples of it.



😂


----------



## jaketanner (Mar 7, 2020)

I think as we buy libraries, we should know their acronyms, it's far quicker to write SCS than to spell it all out. My take on it, is that if I am asking a question for a particular library and use an abbreviation, I just assume that my target audience that would have that answer would know it. Also, it's part of our vocabulary/language as composers/orchestrators and something we should all know. I learn new ones from this forum all the time. Not sure there is one for Cinesamples libraries yet though.. LOL 

It would also be cool if the sample libraries took on those acronyms after the official name. Like Cinematic Studio Strings...(CSS). Also, if the name is short enough, then no need for it, like Afflatus.


----------



## Geoff Grace (Mar 7, 2020)

jaketanner said:


> Also, if the name is short enough, then no need for it, like Afflatus.


Or N. 

Best,

Geoff


----------



## fredmbarros (Mar 10, 2020)

PaulieDC said:


> Whew, I thought it was just me. I really work to keep up with "I started with LASS but it's like VSL where it's just too dry although I like the legs, so I'm working with SCS (afterwards I might jump to SSS) but then I've heard awesome stuff that in CSS and CSSS so I'm kind of undecided right now especially since CS2 is currently on sale... but what if OT puts BS and BB on sale? I'd even go for BWW although I like the room used for SSW and they do more wish list sales. Maybe I should just go for BBCSO since you get the whole package, although there are missing arts, because I did like the full range of instruments I got when I used EWSO... speaking of, maybe the CCX subscription is better, I'll get EWHO and EWHC in Diam... wait, Platinum edition... ah, crikey, I forgot about CH libraries, and then I have to wonder if VEP is equally compatible since I'm only on 4 and I think it's 7 now but licenses dropped from 3 to 1 so maybe I can ditch VEP and get an i9 CPU with NVMe drives for SCS and SSS and LASS and CSS and EWHO and..."
> 
> Maddening.
> 
> ...



Man, I usually don't have any problem with the abbreviations and acronyms used in this group, but I have to tell you that at some point you were throwing so many of them at once that it looked like you were joking about it all...


----------



## PaulieDC (Mar 11, 2020)

fredmbarros said:


> Man, I usually don't have any problem with the abbreviations and acronyms used in this group, but I have to tell you that at some point you were throwing so many of them at once that it looked like you were joking about it all...


I totally was, lol... trying to string them together in a made up paragraph was harder then coming up with an intro for this piece I'm working on!


----------



## Cinebient (Mar 15, 2020)

jaketanner said:


> I think as we buy libraries, we should know their acronyms, it's far quicker to write SCS than to spell it all out. My take on it, is that if I am asking a question for a particular library and use an abbreviation, I just assume that my target audience that would have that answer would know it. Also, it's part of our vocabulary/language as composers/orchestrators and something we should all know. I learn new ones from this forum all the time. Not sure there is one for Cinesamples libraries yet though.. LOL
> 
> It would also be cool if the sample libraries took on those acronyms after the official name. Like Cinematic Studio Strings...(CSS). Also, if the name is short enough, then no need for it, like Afflatus.



Sure, we all just write in stenography then to save our important time (my mother was a stenography teacher).
The truth is we all are just too lazy to write some more words. 
And while it might be true what you say i not belong to the elite here and really often do not know about what you talk. But i´m interested and new members here might suffer even more.
But yes, i know it won´t change.
S i g i c d a g i.....


----------



## jaketanner (Mar 15, 2020)

Cinebient said:


> Sure, we all just write in stenography then to save our important time (my mother was a stenography teacher).
> The truth is we all are just too lazy to write some more words.
> And while it might be true what you say i not belong to the elite here and really often do not know about what you talk. But i´m interested and new members here might suffer even more.
> But yes, i know it won´t change.
> S i g i c d a g i.....


I just think that if someone wants a career as a composer or orchestrator or whatnot, then learning the "shortcuts", is a necessity. After all, who says Nation Baseball Association, or National Basketball Association..or National Academy for Recording Arts and Sciences (The Recording Academy), everyone says NARAS...and so on and so on...we all use acronyms for every aspect of our lives, why should this be any different if it speeds things along. I do understand that most us, myself included, can get lost at times when a new abbreviation comes up, but then we learn it, and move on.  Don't think it has anything to do with being lazy at all...it's just what's accepted. No one here is going to write Cinematic Studio Strings...Sorry, but it's always gonna be CSS.


----------

