# Cinematic Studio Strings -does it replace Cinematic Strings 2?



## Martyn (Mar 28, 2018)

I'm looking for guidance really as I have CS2 and wonder if buying CSS would make CS2 redundant and no longer used, which would seem a waste, or if the differences/benefits of the newer library _vastly_ outweigh CS2 and I can then justify its purchase. 
I'm also debating their Solo strings library but that's a separate issue.

Apologies if this topic has been done to death already and I missed it, but I couldn't find a thread that had asked this specifically.


----------



## Saxer (Mar 28, 2018)

They sound different in room, size, legatos, and vibrato. Having more string libraries is never a waste!


----------



## musicjunk (Mar 28, 2018)

Saxer said:


> They sound different in room, size, legatos, and vibrato. Having more string libraries is never a waste!




as long if musicians work with them 
some people buy gear for years #gas and they forget to make (good) music.

but you are right. always nice to have more then 1 string libary.
different tones/colours. each libary sounds a bit different.


----------



## Martyn (Mar 28, 2018)

Thanks for the replies. I'm no doubt being a bit tight with my spending  but I'd be a bit frustrated if CSS was so much better that it replaced CS2 completely and the latter became totally redundant and unused afterwards.


----------



## ghandizilla (Mar 28, 2018)

The section sizes are bigger. It's a hall, not a studio. Junkie XL still uses it. So yeah, seems pretty usable, though I don't own it


----------



## Headlands (Mar 28, 2018)

I personally prefer CS2 over CSS. I had auditioned both at a friend's studio before I bought, and found CS2 to be, as others have said, a bigger sound because of the section sizes and the hall. I don't know about CSS, but CS2 has does a small amount of tuning issues here and there, which is the only drag about it.


----------



## JonAdamich (Mar 28, 2018)

Both different sounds. I still absolutely love CS2.


----------



## Syneast (Mar 28, 2018)

Like everyone have said, they are different enough.

On the other hand, if CS2 had been nothing but an inferior version of CSS, I wouldn't see any harm in upgrading. CSS offers portamento, true spiccato and true marcato over CS2. Old products do lose value sometimes when new products come around, unfortunately. That should not stop people from buying new products.


----------



## musicjunk (Mar 28, 2018)

@Spitfire

in the video where u show us how to install from hdd the complete data for hz strings is about 183 gb. but i have only a bit over 170 gb. hm...


----------



## D Halgren (Mar 28, 2018)

musicjunk said:


> @Spitfire
> 
> in the video where u show us how to install from hdd the complete data for hz strings is about 183 gb. but i have only a bit over 170 gb. hm...


Wrong place.


----------



## Guffy (Mar 28, 2018)

CS2 is still very much awesome. It's sort of the main ingredient library of strings in my template. Spiced up with more intimate and gritty/close/bright recordings from other libraries.
Call me crazy, but i actually prefer it over CSS.


----------



## Tekkera (Mar 28, 2018)

CS2 offers a similar sound, but recorded in a reverberant hall, and has runs. But CSS seems like a direct upgrade from that. The main difference I can think of in terms of usability, is CSS has the /whole attack/ of notes sampled, and a lot more articulations. This attack makes CSS very unresponsive, especially when trying to quantize the midi, but it sounds so fantastic. It sounds a bit robotic with hand placed quantized midi. But when played with a keyboard, it allows for the natural human error to show through and really brings it to life.


----------



## TimCox (Mar 28, 2018)

Tekkera said:


> This attack makes CSS very unresponsive, especially when trying to quantize the midi, but it sounds so fantastic. It sounds a bit robotic with hand placed quantized midi. But when played with a keyboard, it allows for the natural human error to show through and really brings it to life.



True. It does take some extra work to massage the strings into place but when you get them settled...heaven!


----------



## robgb (Mar 30, 2018)

I'd love to sell my CS2. I never use it because there's way too much room sound. Be nice if we could return sample libraries if we don't like them. You know, like almost everything else we buy.


----------



## Gerbil (Mar 30, 2018)

I find CS2 much easier to play so tend to use it more. CSS is still very much in the template (it sounds lovely if a little too vibrato heavy at times) but I'm not a fan of tweaking in the piano roll and would rather keep doing takes to get it right in a performance than nudge and drag things around afterwards. CS2 is probably the most playable of all the string libraries I have and it sounds really good, especially with one of the divisi sections from LASS layered in for a slightly more focused sound.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jul 26, 2018)

So during a sale....is it worth having both libraries?


----------



## Serg Halen (Jul 26, 2018)

My choice is a CS2 cuz it sounds like really big cinematic strings.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jul 26, 2018)

Serg Halen said:


> My choice is a CS2 cuz it sounds like really big cinematic strings.



That's exactly what I'm after! Thank you.


----------



## paulmatthew (Jul 26, 2018)

The biggest difference for me are the shorts . CSS shorts are much better in my opinion than cs2 . Both have a different sound and depends on which you prefer , but I like them both


----------



## X-Bassist (Jul 26, 2018)

Wolfie2112 said:


> That's exactly what I'm after! Thank you.



With CS2 you’ll also get a decent discount on CSS, which leads to a decent discount on CSSS, and probably CSB... which never expire. What a great developer.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jul 26, 2018)

X-Bassist said:


> With CS2 you’ll also get a decent discount on CSS, which leads to a decent discount on CSSS, and probably CSB... which never expire. What a great developer.



Very cool, thanks. I've heard a lot of positive feedback regarding the company.


----------



## constaneum (Jul 26, 2018)

not just the company. The tone of CSS is beautiful !!!! it's what captured my interest to get it. It's one of my current main string libraries to go with.


----------



## leon chevalier (Jul 26, 2018)

X-Bassist said:


> and probably CSB


No ! Why speaking about CSB !?
Now I'll stay like that again for the whole day :




_Brass, brass, brass, brass, brass, brass, brass, brass, brass, brass, brass, brass, brass, brass, brass, brass, brass, brass, brass, brass, brass..._


----------



## constaneum (Jul 26, 2018)

leon chevalier said:


> No ! Why speaking about CSB !?
> Now I'll stay like that again for the whole day :
> 
> 
> ...



oh dear.....looks pathetic. seriously dude? hahaha


----------



## X-Bassist (Jul 27, 2018)

leon chevalier said:


> No ! Why speaking about CSB !?
> Now I'll stay like that again for the whole day :
> 
> 
> ...



Apologies. But hopefully you can be temporarily satiated by using Cinebrass, Caspian Brass, Hollywood Brass, Berlin Brass, Sample Modeling Brass, Chris Hien Brass, SSB, and Century Brass... no?


----------



## DervishCapkiner (Jul 27, 2018)

I have been debating this very question for over a year and a half ( a year after I bought CS2 and started composing with samples ) however SCC is just saying why? WHY? Why not me, I have so much more and you know you want me...c'mon just put me on your wishlist..yes that's it....good boy.....now...press the red button.....yes the one that says buy....go on...

anyway I'll buy them both once I've justified it to myself somehow

and on and on and now i truly am starting to feel like everybody else in here..


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jul 27, 2018)

DervishCapkiner said:


> I have been debating this very question for over a year and a half ( a year after I bought CS2 and started composing with samples ) however SCC is just saying why? WHY? Why not me, I have so much more and you know you want me...c'mon just put me on your wishlist..yes that's it....good boy.....now...press the red button.....yes the one that says buy....go on...
> 
> anyway I'll buy them both once I've justified it to myself somehow
> 
> and on and on and now i truly am starting to feel like everybody else in here..



Yes, that is me! Honestly, I think Hollywood Strings has over extended its stay at my studio...have used it for years, and it has served me well (just need a change). Many years ago (2010?) I had my eye on Cinematic Strings, the demos blew me away. Even now, it still sounds beautifully programmed to my ears, even over all of the other big names. I'm picking it up regardless, but since there's a loyalty discount, I'll get CSS as well. With both of those, it's still a great buy IMO.


----------



## leon chevalier (Jul 27, 2018)

X-Bassist said:


> Apologies. But hopefully you can be temporarily satiated by using Cinebrass, Caspian Brass, Hollywood Brass, Berlin Brass, Sample Modeling Brass, Chris Hien Brass, SSB, and Century Brass... no?


Ha ha ! But you seem to forgot that...


----------



## jononotbono (Jul 27, 2018)

They are both worth owning. They sound completely different.


----------



## Vik (Jul 27, 2018)

X-Bassist said:


> With CS2 you’ll also get a decent discount on CSS


Is there a discount for CSS users who want CS2 as well?


----------



## X-Bassist (Jul 27, 2018)

Vik said:


> Is there a discount for CSS users who want CS2 as well?



I haven’t heard of it but Alex is an extremely great guy. Email him telling him you own CSS and love the sound of CS2 and how a discount code would make it irrisistable for you.  
[email protected]


----------



## Sovereign (Jul 28, 2018)

Wolfie2112 said:


> Yes, that is me! Honestly, I think Hollywood Strings has over extended its stay at my studio...have used it for years, and it has served me well (just need a change). Many years ago (2010?) I had my eye on Cinematic Strings, the demos blew me away. Even now, it still sounds beautifully programmed to my ears, even over all of the other big names. I'm picking it up regardless, but since there's a loyalty discount, I'll get CSS as well. With both of those, it's still a great buy IMO.


CSS is great, but HWS can sound just as good and has its own advantages over CSS (bigger sound, more dynamics, true nv legato, controllable vibrato). Don't retire it yet.


----------



## JPQ (Jul 28, 2018)

Headlands said:


> I personally prefer CS2 over CSS. I had auditioned both at a friend's studio before I bought, and found CS2 to be, as others have said, a bigger sound because of the section sizes and the hall. I don't know about CSS, but CS2 has does a small amount of tuning issues here and there, which is the only drag about it.



Based manufacturer demos i understand you prefer CS2 more.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jul 29, 2018)

Sovereign said:


> CSS is great, but HWS can sound just as good and has its own advantages over CSS (bigger sound, more dynamics, true nv legato, controllable vibrato). Don't retire it yet.



From what I read, CS2 has controllable vibrato. Ideally, my plan is to go back to using a single computer more often (my Mac) without the slave. Since HS is a memory hog, CS2 should allow me to load up each section with virtually the same footprint a a couple of big HS patches. I will always have a set spot for HS, but would like a change of "scenery".


----------



## The Darris (Jul 29, 2018)

Short answer? No. It doesn't replace CS2. 

Long answer? No, because it adds to it. Both libraries work in almost identical ways. CSS is a much smaller, less produced sound whereas CS2 has a larger, more 'epic' (for lack of a better word) sound to. Both compliment each other very well. You can layer then to get the best of both worlds. Is your arrangement with CSS sounding too thin? Layer in CS2 at around 6-10db quieter than CSS and it sort of thickens the sound without taking away the clarity and definition of CSS. On the other hand. If you need a big sound and CS2 is sounding to washy or thick, just add CSS at 6-10db quieter and you will add some definition without making the strings sound too small. 

These two libraries were obviously developed by the same mind so the workflows are extremely identical. They both offer an easy to use product so you don't have to fuss with too much programming to get a great sound. CSS makes up for a lot that CS2 didn't have, one area being the shorts. You can now create some extremely lively short articulation based musical lines that really enhance a composition far more than CS2 could. 

Long story short if you are looking at spending $600 on one library but thinking about saving half that with just getting CSS or CS2, spend the 600 to get both. Together, they will do the majority of the work you will throw at it and give you a great range of sound with both big and small ensembles. I bought CS2 a while back and hardly used it because it sounded way too big for the type of music I was writing. I reviewed CSS and fell in love with it but I found that it can sound a little too thin for me at times and now I feel like I've gotten my money's worth out of CS2. It's the best companion to CSS in my honest opinion. I also use other strings in conjunction with CSS and CS2 but those are the main ones I start with. I hope my opinions are helpful. 

Cheers,

Chris


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (Jul 29, 2018)

I own CSS, does anyone know if there's a discount to get CS2?

EDIT: There is a discount for CSS owners, I checked with Alex.


----------



## The Darris (Jul 29, 2018)

Land of Missing Parts said:


> I own CSS, does anyone know if there's a discount to get CS2?


There is not. They are different libraries and technically from different companies despite being the same guy who made them.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jul 29, 2018)

Land of Missing Parts said:


> I own CSS, does anyone know if there's a discount to get CS2?



From what I understand, there is a loyalty discount.


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (Jul 29, 2018)

The Darris said:


> There is not. They are different libraries and technically from different companies despite being the same guy who made them.


Thanks, I'll just keep my eye out for a sale.


----------



## Mars (Jul 29, 2018)

In the original CSS thread Alex mentionned a loyalty discount on CSS if you had CS2, it might work in the other way as well. Just send them an e-mail. 

_"you can have CSS working alongside you on your latest project in no time! Existing CS2 customers will receive a 30% discount - you will receive an email with this special offer."_


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jul 30, 2018)

So I picked up CS2 and......WOW! Not only are they easy to use right out of the box, but they sound wonderful...I love the "woody" sound of the violas especially. I will definitely be getting a lot of use out of these. I also don't notice the tuning issues I had with some patches in Hollywood Strings, they were nicely recorded. Will for sure pick up CSS during the next sale. DOn't get me wrong, I still love HS, but CS2 is a wonderful addition.


----------



## igwanna (Oct 7, 2018)

i own both, and they do sound utterly diferent. one thing that frustrates me is the lack of Portamento in these high budget libraries. becauase its something you cant just trick away... thats why i still prefer berlin strings and cinesamples. although CSS is one of the best sounding i have ever heard


----------



## igwanna (Oct 7, 2018)

i meant vibrato not portamento


----------



## RandomComposer (Oct 7, 2018)

Huh? CSS has plenty of vibrato


----------



## igwanna (Oct 7, 2018)

i know, but wheres CSS without vibrato? i see no option here or keyswitch..


----------



## Saxer (Oct 7, 2018)

igwanna said:


> i know, but wheres CSS without vibrato? i see no option here or keyswitch..


I think by default it's CC2


----------



## Vik (Oct 7, 2018)

Have you tried to reduce the vibrato amount with the CC listed here (CC2 is the factory default if I'm not mistaken)?


----------



## midiman (Oct 7, 2018)

I think CSS is light years ahead of CS2. I liked CS2 alright. But CSS is one of the best string libraries ever to come out. But there may be a few circumstances where CS2 may be more suitable than CSS, even if those occasions may be rare.


----------



## igwanna (Oct 7, 2018)

Vik said:


> Have you tried to reduce the vibrato amount with the CC listed here (CC2 is the factory default if I'm not mistaken)?



How did I never notice this
I will try thanks kind sir.


----------



## Chr!s (Oct 7, 2018)

midiman said:


> I think CSS is light years ahead of CS2. I liked CS2 alright. But CSS is one of the best string libraries ever to come out. But there may be a few circumstances where CS2 may be more suitable than CSS, even if those occasions may be rare.



I'm curious to hear more of your insight on this, as I've not thought CSS to offer enough on top of, or so much better than, what CS2 does (outside of maybe more options with legato?) for me to justify "upgrading". It also functions basically in an identical manner to CS2, as I recall. You say that it's "light years ahead", though. Why?


----------



## NoamL (Oct 7, 2018)

I agree it's more advanced, the two main reasons are -

4 distinct short articulations (spiccato, staccatissimo, staccato, short sforzando)
4 distinct legato transition speeds (fast, medium, slow, portamento)
CS2 still sounds great, it's one of the better libraries out there, but CSS is #1 for me (of publicly available libraries, anyway...) because of those two features.

The short articulations are very well programmed and interchangeable. Shown off well in this original composition by @Christof



the legato transition speeds are discrete - they're actually different samples, not the same sample chopped to different lengths based on some CC input. That gives the library enormous flexibility to do fast legato lines, runs, emotional cantabile phrases, everything  as seen in this mockup of a John Williams piece produced by me & @Grim_UniverseWith other libraries I quickly notice that it's exactly the same length legato transition over and over, which isn't realistic. The only other option that most other libraries give the composer is a portamento transition that's usually way too soupy!


----------



## midiman (Oct 7, 2018)

Chr!s said:


> I'm curious to hear more of your insight on this, as I've not thought CSS to offer enough on top of, or so much better than, what CS2 does (outside of maybe more options with legato?) for me to justify "upgrading". It also functions basically in an identical manner to CS2, as I recall. You say that it's "light years ahead", though. Why?



It is more advanced as @NoamL said on the previous post for the reasons he stated. But also, when I love a library it is usually not only for their features (which are AMAZING anyways in CSS) but also and more so for the overall quality of the sound it produces, and the ease-of-use. Also, how inspiring it is. How musical it is. Cinematic Studio Strings, rates high on all these. I could not get the same quality and musicality on a piece programmed with CS2, as I do on CSS.

The legato quality on CSS is amazing, and feels musical to my ears. The agility of the legato is impressive. Meaning that lines speak-out really well through a thick texture, because of the different legato speeds available.

For me it is also #1 String Library overall. There are other libraries that cover specific areas better than CSS, but CSS has the best on most uses, and has the best legato quality.

Hope this helps you decide. CS2 is good. But CSS, no doubt in my mind, takes things to the next level, if not several levels above. CSS is a joy to work with.


----------



## Consona (Oct 7, 2018)

midiman said:


> I think CSS is light years ahead of CS2. I liked CS2 alright. But CSS is one of the best string libraries ever to come out. But there may be a few circumstances where CS2 may be more suitable than CSS, even if those occasions may be rare.


Live mode is something I miss in every other string library. I was really surprised this fantastic feature did not return in CSS.


----------

