# CSW or Berlin Woodwinds — There can be only one



## Soundbed (Nov 23, 2021)




----------



## ChrisSiuMusic (Nov 23, 2021)

I mean...Spiderman saved both the kids in the tramcar and MJ


----------



## Zanshin (Nov 23, 2021)

Synchron Woodwinds isn't on the list? It's going to come out in Dec (I hope lol).

Of those choices I voted for Berlin.


----------



## Russell Anderson (Nov 23, 2021)

I liked the Spanish "Cinematic Composing" dude's video on youtube comparing them. CSW is naturally more forward because of the space, BWW is naturally further back... and both are great. I voted BWW because I herd u leik depthz and also, Infinite Woodwinds represent


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 23, 2021)

Russell Anderson said:


> I liked the Spanish "Cinematic Composing" dude's video on youtube comparing them. CSW is naturally more forward because of the space, BWW is naturally further back... and both are great. I voted BWW because I herd u leik depthz and also, Infinite Woodwinds represent


I added Infinite to the list! I only saw part of Mark's flute or piccolo video ... I'll have to go check out the rest of them, thanks for the reminder!


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 23, 2021)

Zanshin said:


> Synchron Woodwinds isn't on the list? It's going to come out in Dec (I hope lol).
> 
> Of those choices I voted for Berlin.


Hmm... I didn't think to add products not yet released. But in general I have been looking forward to getting Berlin WW for a couple years and looking for the "magic" rather than the "accuracy" ... I tend to think of VSL as more "accurate" and Berlin as a bit more "magic".


----------



## DarkShinryu (Nov 23, 2021)

BWW for a traditional orchestra sound, CSW for a studio sound.

If I'm really forced to choose than CSW, I have a preference for the studio sound and I love the consistency and ease of use of the cinematic studio series.


----------



## Tralen (Nov 23, 2021)

Soundbed said:


>


I miss those olden days, when scottish people were the cream of spaniard swordsmen.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic (Nov 23, 2021)

Not many folks will have all the options in your list, but I (regrettably) do - and I like Berlin the best.


----------



## RonV (Nov 23, 2021)

Interesting that they left the low end (Bass Clarinet and Contra-Bassoon) out of the main BWW library. They can be added of course, but those 2 seem fairly common.


----------



## Trash Panda (Nov 23, 2021)

Surprised VSL didn't make this list as their woodwinds are always praised here.

I _want_ to vote CSW because the sound is gorgeous and programmability is *chef's kiss*, but my heart belongs to Infinite Winds.


----------



## Confuzzly (Nov 23, 2021)

I own both BWW and CSW. I use BWW for general ensemble use and CSW for more exposed passages.

If I HAD to pick one, I guess it would be Berlin as I find it more flexible, but I would certainly miss having CSW as well.


----------



## NoamL (Nov 23, 2021)

No matter which one you pick, you'll get best results if you automate the close mics. Those mics should be brought up for featured, soulful melody solos... and pushed down for section work. Just like in a real score mix. If you rely on the out of the box mix then you won't get the best of both worlds, in particular CSW's default mix is pretty close to a "featured solos" mix. When everything is "in focus" then the music has no foreground or background...just be careful with that.

You can get a symphonic sound from CSW for sure - I did some work last month with them on a symphonic-sounding project that got approved easily. Each of the Cinematic Studio libraries is also recorded with rather better techniques than the previous, I reckon- you barely need to eq CSW.

The library has extremely smooth legato and the agile marcato legato is almost like cheat mode. The one instrument I don't really like is the clarinet solo & a2 (kinda "tubey" sounding) but everything else feels right on the money tonally & musically. Bass Clarinet, Alto Flute, and Oboe are all standout instruments t my ears as a non woodwind player...

If you want super expressive, progressive-vibrato melodies (that are rather slow) then either SSW or BBW will serve you well, I would give the slight edge to SSW but you have to finesse the samples & programming A LOT more than CSW right now. Maybe they will update the programming in the future.


----------



## RM 13 (Nov 23, 2021)

Both are great options but I still think BWW is the best Woodwind sample collection ever captured. Their tone is just stunning, in most cases feels like the player is right in front of you. Again, you won't be disappointed with either of them.


----------



## Trash Panda (Nov 23, 2021)

NoamL said:


> No matter which one you pick, you'll get best results if you automate the close mics. Those mics should be brought up for featured, soulful melody solos... and pushed down for section work. Just like in a real score mix. If you rely on the out of the box mix then you won't get the best of both worlds, in particular CSW's default mix is pretty close to a "featured solos" mix. When everything is "in focus" then the music has no foreground or background...just be careful with that.


I think this is something that gets overlooked a LOT, especially by rookies like me.

Are there good resources out there that speak to automating different mic levels and what that looks like in real world recordings and best practices?

I know the adage is "use your ears" but it helps knowing how it's done so one can "train their ears."


----------



## Evans (Nov 23, 2021)

The ugly crossfading between layers in CSW's solo instrument sustains is something that I can't handle.

And I understand that I could just find a dynamic and stick with it for a given note to circumvent that, but I find it really difficult/annoying to dial in to the precise value on CC1 to not have two layers playing at once.

EDIT: Also, see my signature. Don't trust my advice. Most of my work - which is *minimal* - is live guitar, some percussion, and occasionally laying in some VIs on friends' projects. Aging metalheads don't exactly call for woodwinds.


----------



## NoamL (Nov 23, 2021)

Trash Panda said:


> I think this is something that gets overlooked a LOT, especially by rookies like me.
> 
> Are there good resources out there that speak to automating different mic levels and what that looks like in real world recordings and best practices?
> 
> I know the adage is "use your ears" but it helps knowing how it's done so one can "train their ears."


Suggest listening to lots of scores but especially ones recorded on a very transparent stage like FOX or SONY. Something like Joel McNeeley's "A Million Ways To Die In The West" or Henry Jackman's "Jumanji The Next Level." And just pay attention to the woodwind perspective (not just levels but how far away they feel) with something like a _mp_ clarinet solo vs woodwind runs in the middle of an action cue.

I don't mean to dishearten you but this is why I'm skeptical of one-mic-plus-IR's style libraries like Infinite and Sample Modeling. Real score mixes are kinda Cubist: several perspectives layered at the same time to get the best of each.


----------



## Rob Elliott (Nov 23, 2021)

NoamL said:


> No matter which one you pick, you'll get best results if you automate the close mics. Those mics should be brought up for featured, soulful melody solos... and pushed down for section work. Just like in a real score mix. If you rely on the out of the box mix then you won't get the best of both worlds, in particular CSW's default mix is pretty close to a "featured solos" mix. When everything is "in focus" then the music has no foreground or background...just be careful with that.
> 
> You can get a symphonic sound from CSW for sure - I did some work last month with them on a symphonic-sounding project that got approved easily. Each of the Cinematic Studio libraries is also recorded with rather better techniques than the previous, I reckon- you barely need to eq CSW.
> 
> ...


I couldn't agree more with automating the close mics for solos. Can you tell me your mic blend for pushing CSW for section work (for a fairly 'large' studio sound). Really curious on this.


----------



## Trash Panda (Nov 23, 2021)

NoamL said:


> Suggest listening to lots of scores but especially ones recorded on a very transparent stage like FOX or SONY. Something like Joel McNeeley's "A Million Ways To Die In The West" or Henry Jackman's "Jumanji The Next Level." And just pay attention to the woodwind perspective (not just levels but how far away they feel) with something like a _mp_ clarinet solo vs woodwind runs in the middle of an action cue.


Yeah, that's not how my brain works to process information, hence the question about resources that describe typical setups in recordings. 

Unless your ears are already trained to understand "OK, this sounds like tree mic at full on its own with -inf dB close mics on the horns until Kylo's ship lands" then trying to figure this out just by "using your ears" is about as efficient of a learning process as trying to stab a fly with a foil to learn how to fence.


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 23, 2021)

NoamL said:


> No matter which one you pick, you'll get best results if you automate the close mics. Those mics should be brought up for featured, soulful melody solos... and pushed down for section work. Just like in a real score mix. If you rely on the out of the box mix then you won't get the best of both worlds, in particular CSW's default mix is pretty close to a "featured solos" mix. When everything is "in focus" then the music has no foreground or background...just be careful with that.
> 
> You can get a symphonic sound from CSW for sure - I did some work last month with them on a symphonic-sounding project that got approved easily. Each of the Cinematic Studio libraries is also recorded with rather better techniques than the previous, I reckon- you barely need to eq CSW.
> 
> ...


Very helpful! 


NoamL said:


> Suggest listening to lots of scores but especially ones recorded on a very transparent stage like FOX or SONY. Something like Joel McNeeley's "A Million Ways To Die In The West" or Henry Jackman's "Jumanji The Next Level." And just pay attention to the woodwind perspective (not just levels but how far away they feel) with something like a _mp_ clarinet solo vs woodwind runs in the middle of an action cue.
> 
> I don't mean to dishearten you but this is why I'm skeptical of one-mic-plus-IR's style libraries like Infinite and Sample Modeling. Real score mixes are kinda Cubist: several perspectives layered at the same time to get the best of each.


Thanks for those specific references! I'm glad to see a current movie on there like Jackman's recent Jumanji.

I do have CSW but don't want to miss the Berlin and Spitfire sales this year, because this is the year I finally try to write more for woodwinds (he told himself).


----------



## PlumeLilas (Nov 23, 2021)

The sound of Berlin is really stunning so I voted for Berlin.
CsW I don't know it really well, I only heard a few walkthrough.

Otherwise I have Sofia Woodwinds that I love, it's recorded dry so you can tweak how you like and it just sounds gorgeous with a lot of instruments in it, I think there are as many as in Berlin.
I layer them and it sounds very beautiful.
I don't know the other libraries.

But Berlin is just magnificent for an orchestral use.
And I want to grab the Claire bundle from 8dio, but I try to reason myself.
Their oboe and their flute, oh, I want them so much!
I seem attacked by the GAS, but more for winds than strings and brass.


----------



## Noeticus (Nov 23, 2021)

VSL Woodwinds, but since not on the list then Berlin.


----------



## Henu (Nov 23, 2021)

It's a tough one. I _love _SSW, but if I'd had to choose between that and BWW, I would need to pick BWW for it's sheer versatility and less baked-in reverb.


----------



## Noeticus (Nov 23, 2021)

I use "Altiverb 7" when I need realism in my reverb.


----------



## Russell Anderson (Nov 24, 2021)

I’m in the midst of deciding whether I want BWW and Infinite, or just Infinite. I’m leaning towards owning both, but it’s not a cheap decision. My worry with owning Infinite alone is the spatialization, and the tonality of the instruments in some cases sometimes sounding synthy; also the ease of programming of samples for workflow when I’m not writing super exposed or demanding parts, in terms of expression.


----------



## Jonathan Moray (Nov 24, 2021)

For me, the choice is easy.

Some of you probably know which I would choose and the reasons are still the same as always: Infinite Woodwinds because of the playability, amount of phrasing and expression possible, the plethora of instruments, and the faith I put in Aaron because he's already proven multiple times that the instruments will only get better with time. And I hope at some point the timbre will be indistinguishable from other sample libraries, but it's still (for the most part) good enough as is even if it could be better. He is also always expanding the selection of instruments available without any added cost and plan on doing more ethnic woodwinds at some point.

So, if I can only choose one, then it's definitely Infinite Woodwinds because the others might get one or two minor updates, but they won't get much better or more expansive than they already are, while Infinite is an evolving product.

If not IW then I would choose CSW because it's still the most consistent among the others and has one of the timbres I like the best with the most expressive legato.


----------



## constaneum (Nov 24, 2021)

CSW. It has the consistencies and if you want that scoring stage sound, you can EQ it to make it sound thinner and push back. BWW by nature sounds thinner but if you wanna bring it more upfront, I'm not sure about boosting signals to make it sound thicker. EQ to push back and make it sounds thinner, I've heard of it but the other way round? I'm not so sure about it.


----------



## Scamper (Nov 24, 2021)

At the moment, it's straight up CSW for me.

The tone is lovely, the instruments feel lively, it's super consistent between the instruments, articulations and flexible shorts, the legato is great and it's very playable - the marcato patches are effectively a proper performance patch. With the mic options, it can be upfront with lots of body (love those OH mics) and also pushed back for an orchestral context.

The clarinet feels like the weaker instrument of the library, I'd like to have second soloists, the transition between dynamic layers could be smoother and I hope they soon iron out the final kinks, but overall this might be the most solid orchestral library I've used. The price is also very reasonable.

If Infinite Woodwinds had the tone, it might choose this one, but right now, CSW sounds way better to me. Maybe this will change with future updates.


----------



## Akarin (Nov 24, 2021)

NoamL said:


> No matter which one you pick, you'll get best results if you automate the close mics. Those mics should be brought up for featured, soulful melody solos... and pushed down for section work. Just like in a real score mix. If you rely on the out of the box mix then you won't get the best of both worlds, in particular CSW's default mix is pretty close to a "featured solos" mix. When everything is "in focus" then the music has no foreground or background...just be careful with that.
> 
> You can get a symphonic sound from CSW for sure - I did some work last month with them on a symphonic-sounding project that got approved easily. Each of the Cinematic Studio libraries is also recorded with rather better techniques than the previous, I reckon- you barely need to eq CSW.
> 
> ...



You can't automate BWW close mic anymore... because Sine doesn't support CCs for mic faders.


----------



## Russell Anderson (Nov 24, 2021)

Akarin said:


> You can't automate BWW close mic anymore... because Sine doesn't support CCs for mic faders.


I’ve read that, but in the back of my mind thought “I can still automate it from within the DAW so it doesn’t matter”; can you not even do that?


----------



## I like music (Nov 24, 2021)

Russell Anderson said:


> I’m in the midst of deciding whether I want BWW and Infinite, or just Infinite. I’m leaning towards owning both, but it’s not a cheap decision. My worry with owning Infinite alone is the spatialization, and the tonality of the instruments in some cases sometimes sounding synthy; also the ease of programming of samples for workflow when I’m not writing super exposed or demanding parts, in terms of expression.


If you DM me anything you'd want mocked, I've literally got them both opened up in front of me. I won't post any comparisons publicly because I generally don't know what I'm doing, so risk damaging the reputation of any sample libraries with any mockups or tests, with my mangled up chain of reverbs etc.

But I did try to bring both libraries into a similar room. Happy to share snippets directly with you, if it helps with the decision.

My personal opinion, I can't really tell. Infinite is super flexible and will always remain in my template. But I just brought BWW back into my template, threw on some room mics, put it through Cubase's stock reverb, and I just fecking love the tone.


----------



## Russell Anderson (Nov 24, 2021)

I like music said:


> If you DM me anything you'd want mocked, I've literally got them both opened up in front of me. I won't post any comparisons publicly because I generally don't know what I'm doing, so risk damaging the reputation of any sample libraries with any mockups or tests, with my mangled up chain of reverbs etc.
> 
> But I did try to bring both libraries into a similar room. Happy to share snippets directly with you, if it helps with the decision.
> 
> My personal opinion, I can't really tell. Infinite is super flexible and will always remain in my template. But I just brought BWW back into my template, threw on some room mics, put it through Cubase's stock reverb, and I just fecking love the tone.


I would warmly accept such a thing, and in fact, whatever is easiest for you. Instead of me sending you MIDI, what if you came up with whatever short ditty that you felt comfortable modulating, and maybe sent me the mics independently so I could try mixing them myself in my DAW? That would honestly be incredible. 

Is it even possible to play Infinite without the IRs active?


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 24, 2021)

Very cool discussion, everyone. It’s not making my choice any easier! I’m honestly surprised CSW is ahead of BWW though, in the voting.


----------



## novaburst (Nov 24, 2021)

Soundbed said:


> I added Infinite to the list! I only saw part of Mark's flute or piccolo video ... I'll have to go check out the rest of them, thanks for the reminder!


I think also VSL woodwinds are very good, maybe , if I only could pick one I think I would go with BWW because of the warmth, and kontakt programming, have not ported over to Sine as yet but only expect incredible loading times, as Sine is quick.


----------



## Russell Anderson (Nov 24, 2021)

novaburst said:


> I think also VSL woodwinds are very good, maybe , if I only could pick one I think I would go with BWW because of the warmth, and kontakt programming, have not ported over to Sine as yet but only expect incredible loading times, as Sine is quick.


Tell me Sine is optimized for PCIE 4.0 speeds.

Actually, tell me that after Sine stops playing THX on random legato intervals. But even so!


----------



## Akarin (Nov 24, 2021)

Russell Anderson said:


> I’ve read that, but in the back of my mind thought “I can still automate it from within the DAW so it doesn’t matter”; can you not even do that?


Maybe, I didn't try. It wouldn't really match my workflow anyway as I'd be looking at the automation lanes for BWW and at the CCs for all the other libs. I'm all about simplicity and consistency in order to work faster.


----------



## Geoff Grace (Nov 24, 2021)

This video may be useful:




Note: it predates the release of CSW. 

Best,

Geoff


----------



## Evans (Nov 24, 2021)

Geoff Grace said:


> Note: it predates the release of CSW.


I _think_ at some point she said that she likes her current stuff well enough to not feel the need to try out any others.


----------



## Getsumen (Nov 24, 2021)

Soundbed said:


> Very cool discussion, everyone. It’s not making my choice any easier! I’m honestly surprised CSW is ahead of BWW though, in the voting.


Considering that CSW is (or I suppose was) a lot cheaper than BWW, it's probably because a lot more people have CSW in the first place.


----------



## Geoff Grace (Nov 24, 2021)

Getsumen said:


> Considering that CSW is (or I suppose was) a lot cheaper than BWW, it's probably because a lot more people have CSW in the first place.


I think that’s got to be a factor. It also helps that the entire Cinematic Studio Series offers a consistent level of quality and value above its price point.

The Berlin Woodwinds at 50% off, however, are almost a no-brainer, especially for the revered Kontakt version.

If there could be more than one, I would buy the Kontakt version now of BWW, while it’s still an option, and then buy CSW and/or the Sine upgrade of BWW at my leisure, if needed. 

Best,

Geoff


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 24, 2021)

Geoff Grace said:


> This video may be useful:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yes, AKD. This video was a big influence on me wanting BWW.



Getsumen said:


> Considering that CSW is (or I suppose was) a lot cheaper than BWW, it's probably because a lot more people have CSW in the first place.


You might be right. I asked the same question in the Facebook Virtual Orchestration group and BWW is ahead while CSW is behind.



Geoff Grace said:


> I would buy the Kontakt version now of BWW


I might do that. I'm still happier with Kontakt than with SINE overall. For instance I'll reach for Kontakt Ark 1 & 2 first even though they've been ported to SINE. If I really feel the need to get the SINE versions some day I'll pay the extra 10% ... I guess?


----------



## Robert_G (Nov 24, 2021)

I think if Synchron Woodwinds is anywhere near as good as Synchron Brass......things could get interesting.

The singular (currently) vote for Opus Woodwinds doesn't surprise me at all.


----------



## TintoL (Nov 24, 2021)

I don't have CSW, But I have SSW, BWW and VSL synchronized.

From the three of them, SSW is the most lyrical and expressive of all by far. VSL has good legatos, but the sounds is relatively dead, at least to me.

BWW sounds awesome in arrangement and has the room sound that is more balanced and not as wet as the SSW. But, the legatos, I dear to say are better in SSW. BWW, exposed have a slight weaker legatos. SSW are better exposed.

Today, I would honestly grab both. Why: BWW has the advantage of multiple solos, and a sound with a signature room.

CSW is flexible for solos, smaller stages and even big rooms. Also, and very important, it has the consistency to even balance out of the box a whole orchestra if you have CSS and CSB.

If there can be only one, McLoud, it would be CSW, unfortunately for me. 

Specially knowing that if you buy BWW right now, I would get the kontakt version, as the legatos in SINE, I can confirm on my end are weaker than in the original BWW (not revive.). This makes a case to whether it makes sense to pay so much money on a library that has degraded with time, and that will push you to use instead the first version of years ago.


----------



## Project Anvil (Nov 24, 2021)

CSW for the legatos, longs and the marcato patches. BWW for shorts, trills, flourishes. SSW for the room, VSL for special solo cases. HWW for flourishes/runs. Some select patches from HOW or even the old EWQL are also neat (clarinet staccatissimo for example)

I voted CSW ultimately because BWW is a cackling hag when it comes to consistency. There is no volume consistency in BWW whatsoever, I had to rebalance all the patches manually. Revive does improve the legatos but introduces a problem of patch/articulation inconsistency and mic inconsistencies too.

Woodwind libraries never fail to drive me insane to the point where I've seriously considered just rolling my own


----------



## I like music (Nov 24, 2021)

Russell Anderson said:


> I would warmly accept such a thing, and in fact, whatever is easiest for you. Instead of me sending you MIDI, what if you came up with whatever short ditty that you felt comfortable modulating, and maybe sent me the mics independently so I could try mixing them myself in my DAW? That would honestly be incredible.
> 
> Is it even possible to play Infinite without the IRs active?


Cool. Will share something like this for BWW.

Honestly, not sure if that's possible with Infinite. I think you can mute the mics, but there are probably implications for if I extracted a mic at a time. Something may go wrong. Anyways, can try and see!


----------



## I like music (Nov 24, 2021)

This video probably made 1000s of Euros for Orchestral tools...

I know they got my money pretty much thanks to these 5 minutes.

Also note that this demo is from 2012...!!!


----------



## Trash Panda (Nov 24, 2021)

Russell Anderson said:


> Is it even possible to play Infinite without the IRs active?


Yes. Choose Studio room, Soloist position, Solo the close mic.

In the wrench view it shows all the Convolutions disabled when doing this.


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 24, 2021)

TintoL said:


> the legatos in SINE, I can confirm on my end are weaker than in the original BWW


even the woodwinds specifically? I was tired by that long thread but it seemed most people were pointing out brass issues ...


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 24, 2021)

I like music said:


> This video probably made 1000s of Euros for Orchestral tools...
> 
> I know they got my money pretty much thanks to these 5 minutes.
> 
> Also note that this demo is from 2012...!!!



Actually ... I wonder how this would sound with CSW as the source instruments ... maybe even Popelka Bassoon? (currently $19 I think)

Not sure if the CSW clarinet(s) would hold up... maybe.

...but I'd bet @ism could make the flutes and piccolo sound as lively.

And overall I'm guessing Sascha could probably have done about as well CSW, although the room would have needed a bit of work to match Teldex ... hmmm 

That said Sascha could probably make a sample of my sneakers on a gym floor sound like an orchestra.


----------



## Russell Anderson (Nov 24, 2021)

Akarin said:


> Maybe, I didn't try. It wouldn't really match my workflow anyway as I'd be looking at the automation lanes for BWW and at the CCs for all the other libs. I'm all about simplicity and consistency in order to work faster.


I would assign it to a macro and then assign midi cc to the macro. That may work. 

For all of the things FL Studio drives me nuts over, some of it is pretty great. Totally off topic, but I’m trying to make my mind up on the Cubase sale (+ crossgrade), or Reaper, since I’d like to leave FL Studio for orchestral music. And if I ever work in a studio, Cubase is a good skill set to have. :x


----------



## TintoL (Nov 24, 2021)

Soundbed said:


> even the woodwinds specifically? I was tired by that long thread but it seemed most people were pointing out brass issues ...


I understand, that OT announcement thread is supper long. And related to multiple questions none related too.

I am giving my own opinion from the product as objective as possible. I am actually working on a piece that has relatively exposed woodwinds. And actually was comparing which flute to use. The legato on sine is substantially weaker than the revive. And the rivive is also a bit weaker from the original one. In this case, because the flute melody I was writing was relatively exposed, I choose the SSW.

Now, the sine legatos for BWW are still relatively fine, at least to my ears. I mean I haven't heard any horrific legato or articulation doing what other people are posting about BB. In an arrangement, the instruments I have tested in sine are still fine. But, I mean, recently, there is an example, in that OT thread about BB, that to me, should actually leave OT in a hard spot.

It's such a massive shame, I really wanted to buy BB. Like counting the months. Because I love the sound. But, I will pass.


----------



## NoamL (Nov 24, 2021)

Rob Elliott said:


> I couldn't agree more with automating the close mics for solos. Can you tell me your mic blend for pushing CSW for section work (for a fairly 'large' studio sound). Really curious on this.


Always a continuing experiment, but right now I've got the Spots and OH pushed down by 15! Might be too much...

I also take the close mic down on the CSB heavy brass (tpt+tbn+tuba). That's where that studio sound comes from.


----------



## Geoff Grace (Nov 24, 2021)

Here’s another resource:






John Powell's 2021 Template


We've had discussions on composer's templates before but I thought I would share a pic of John Powell's current Orch Template that he just shared. A lot of what he is using isn't the newest stuff on the market, a fun reminder when we see all the new toys we might want. Interesting to note that...




vi-control.net





Best,

Geoff


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 24, 2021)

TintoL said:


> I understand, that OT announcement thread is supper long. And related to multiple questions none related too.
> 
> I am giving my own opinion from the product as objective as possible. I am actually working on a piece that has relatively exposed woodwinds. And actually was comparing which flute to use. The legato on sine is substantially weaker than the revive. And the rivive is also a bit weaker from the original one. In this case, because the flute melody I was writing was relatively exposed, I choose the SSW.
> 
> ...


Wow thank you for sharing your experience. I will need to research if Revive is in Kontakt? I might still get the Kontakt and hope it’s not revive I guess? Interesting times.


----------



## Geoff Grace (Nov 24, 2021)

My understanding is that the only Kontakt version currently available is the Revive one. More here:






Berlin Woodwinds Revive - Crossgrade from BWW Legacy available again!


Hi folks, we've been asked again and again to re-introduce the crossgrade from BWW (Legacy) to BWW Revive, which has not been available for technical reasons for a good while. But now it is back! Head to https://www.orchestraltools.com/store/collections/berlin-woodwinds-crossgrade to get the...




vi-control.net





Best,

Geoff


----------



## TintoL (Nov 24, 2021)

Soundbed said:


> Wow thank you for sharing your experience. I will need to research if Revive is in Kontakt? I might still get the Kontakt and hope it’s not revive I guess? Interesting times.


Revive was the second pass they did to BWW and is in kontakt. Both the original and the revive version are in kontakt. Both are very good and quite close together. Is the SINE version that, to me, separates from the two.

I am not sure about this, But, I think that if you buy the kontakt version it should come with both, legacy and revive.


----------



## Geoff Grace (Nov 24, 2021)

I think it has some, but not all, of the legacy content; but I’m not sure either. More here:



ProfoundSilence said:


> I'm not sure why it's so confusing, but the content in revive contains SOME of the legacy instruments, but 2/3 of the library is actually completely different material and only 1/3 of the library contains anything from BWW legacy recordings. It also of course comes with BWW legacy since they not longer sold the library - but paying 200$ or whatever for 8 new solo instruments is the most cost effective expansion I can think of.
> 
> Sadly, the only way to avoid the confusion would have been to just call it an expansion entirely so that people wouldn't gripe when they had to pay for nearly a whole 2nd library.


Best,

Geoff


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 24, 2021)

Geoff Grace said:


> Here’s another resource:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


yeah I remember that thread ... I certainly am not simply trying to buy the newest, only "the best" at this point. and while Berlin WW is on sale ... it seems (between this thread and the one on FB that it's neck and neck with CSW which actually says a lot about CSW.


----------



## Geoff Grace (Nov 24, 2021)

The thing that stood out to me was that John Powell chose Spitfire for his woodwinds. Maybe they’re worth a second look?

Best,

Geoff


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 24, 2021)

Found a nice video with a comparison between BWW and CSW online:


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 24, 2021)

Geoff Grace said:


> The thing that stood out to me was that John Powell chose Spitfire for his woodwinds. Maybe they’re worth a second look?
> 
> Best,
> 
> Geoff


People seem to like Spitfire for lyrical stuff. I’ll have another look.


----------



## lettucehat (Nov 24, 2021)

Keep in mind that a lot of people who use samples don't rely on them for finished products. In general I think it's important to keep in mind how each person giving their opinion (or implicit endorsement a la John Powell) uses samples to different ends. I haven't seen too many people who own BWW and also rely on samples entirely for their work give it a bad review, and that means a lot to me. I think all of the big three are excellent in different ways, many of which don't overlap much at all.


----------



## AMBi (Nov 24, 2021)

I had this decision earlier this year since I wanted to "be done" struggling to find the perfect woodwind library for me and just shell out the cash for a complete set that was highly regarded.
I went with CSW in the end but I know it's a hard choice from both ends.

On one hand Orchestral Tools rarely does sales so if you choose CSW and are disappointed it will make the regret of not getting BWW all the more painful.
And if you're disappointed by BWW the CSW discount isn't going anywhere if you already have a CS product so it won't be as out of reach to obtain afterwards.

On the other hand when BWW comes to SINE it shouldn't be too costly to buy a few woodwinds you may have felt let down by with CSW to fill in those gaps.

I personally don't think you'll be disappointed with either choice since they're both among the best woodwinds available, but BWW is arguably the best value for money currently since it's already rare enough to see on sale and has a significantly longer shelf life and user experience since it's been out much longer and is *still* as highly regarded as it is.

And while CSW has been perfect for me since I like the more intimate studio sound, it's still young and needs some wrinkles ironed out with updates.

If it becomes too much to bounce between walkthroughs and demos you can always post a MIDI file you put together to test the individual instruments in small phrases and compare them to see which you like more.
I'm sure the other VI Control members will contribute and run them through real quick.
Best of luck!


----------



## storyteller (Nov 24, 2021)

Geoff Grace said:


> My understanding is that the only Kontakt version currently available is the Revive one. More here:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I might be wrong since I owned Legacy first, but my understanding is that the Kontakt version of Revive comes with both Legacy and Revive as separate sets of samples and instruments contained within the single BWW Kontakt Library. Revive is comprised of about 2/3 completely new recordings… per your other post. The remaining part of Revive was remixed and re-edited from Legacy. Unless they changed something, that has been my understanding regarding Revive so far. BUT - legacy is NOT in the SINE version… hopefully In the future though!


----------



## Henu (Nov 24, 2021)

storyteller said:


> Kontakt version of Revive comes with both Legacy and Revive as separate sets of samples and instruments contained within the single BWW Kontakt Library.


Can confirm, I have Revive and it contains both libraries in separate folders. Which actually is a very nice move!


----------



## GNP (Nov 24, 2021)

I only still rely on Berlin WW only because I rarely use woodwinds. But when I do, Berlin's good enough for me. No point wasting money collecting more woodwind libraries.


----------



## Geoff Grace (Nov 25, 2021)

lettucehat said:


> Keep in mind that a lot of people who use samples don't rely on them for finished products. In general I think it's important to keep in mind how each person giving their opinion (or implicit endorsement a la John Powell) uses samples to different ends. I haven't seen too many people who own BWW and also rely on samples entirely for their work give it a bad review, and that means a lot to me. I think all of the big three are excellent in different ways, many of which don't overlap much at all.


That's a very good point. I doubt John Powell uses Spitfire Symphonic Woodwinds much, if at all, in his finished products. At most, I think they would act as a supplement or enhancement to the real thing.

While I personally have the highest expectations for the Kontakt version of Berlin Woodwinds, I thought I should at least provide an example of the Spitfire ones being used by someone who has done a number of very good mockups, Alex Ball (@alexballmusic):




In this video from 2018, Alex discusses his mockup methods and the libraries he uses. Even if you're not interested in Spitfire, the video is a great primer for orchestral mockup tools and methods. Here's the related thread:






My big fat guide to using a virtual orchestra.


Hi all I've made an hour long guide to using VIs to create realistic orchestral mock ups and recordings. Hope it's helpful.




vi-control.net





Best,

Geoff


----------



## Futchibon (Nov 25, 2021)




----------



## novaburst (Nov 25, 2021)

TintoL said:


> am not sure about this, But, I think that if you buy the kontakt version it should come with both, legacy and revive.


It comes with legacy, only


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 25, 2021)

novaburst said:


> It comes with legacy, only


Yeah. Looks like Revive is an add’l 99EUR crossgrade. 









Berlin Woodwinds Revive Crossgrade


This license is exclusively for people who already own the original Berlin Woodwinds (Legacy version for Kontakt, sold from 2012 to 2017), and provides them with the additional content contained in the later ‘Revive’ version in the Kontakt version. After purchasing this license, a crossgrade to...




www.orchestraltools.com


----------



## holywilly (Nov 25, 2021)

oh man, I’m also on the fence to buy Berlin woodwinds, can’t resist the 50% off deal. As a long time VSL user, I’ve been rocking VSL woodwinds for decades and still loving them. The Synchron woodwinds is just at the corner…..hmm….. decisions decisions.


----------



## storyteller (Nov 25, 2021)

Soundbed said:


> Yeah. Looks like Revive is an add’l 99EUR crossgrade.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I think that is incorrect. Revive Kontakt comes with both Legacy and Revive. This was verified by @Henu earlier as well. That upgrade is for people who owed BWW before Revive was released. For example, I punched the upgrade to get Revive’s new instruments.


----------



## Mr Greg G (Nov 25, 2021)

Soundbed said:


> People seem to like Spitfire for lyrical stuff.


CSW can be very lyrical. When I was looking for a Woodwinds library several months ago, I found CSW to be the most expressive Woodwinds library I ever used (Cinesamples, VSL, Berlin, Spitfire). 

What I liked is that it was very lyrical, and it had a huge dynamic range recorded which lacked in all the other libraries, except in some instruments from CineWinds. When my modwheel is all the way up, it really feels like the players are blowing their lungs off. On the opposite, when it’s all the way down, every instrument sounds very quiet. And these are actual recordings and not just one dynamic layer which volume is turned up or down.

You also have vibrato control, and lots of short articulations like in MSS.


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 25, 2021)

storyteller said:


> I think that is incorrect. Revive Kontakt comes with both Legacy and Revive. This was verified by @Henu earlier as well. That upgrade is for people who owed BWW before Revive was released. For example, I punched the upgrade to get Revive’s new instruments.


@Henu and you are both saying that you have Legacy when you have Revive. Their store looks like you’re purchasing Legacy when you buy Kontakt, and separately, Revive is an upgrade fee that will not work without purchasing Legacy first. I can sort it with OT support.


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 25, 2021)

This seems to answer it. If I buy it today for Kontakt I will need to pay the cross grade price to get revive. As of Nov 18, 2021






Berlin Woodwinds SINEplayer Crossgrades - Orchestral Tools Helpdesk


If you want to crossgrade Berlin Woodwinds to SINE Player, the process depends on when you bought it: If you crossgraded your original BWW (Legacy) to BWW Reviv




orchestraltools.helpscoutdocs.com


----------



## Geoff Grace (Nov 25, 2021)

My understanding from the 2017 Revive announcement thread below is that Revive is what’s now referred to as “Berlin Woodwinds.”



OrchestralTools said:


> *So, bottom line ...*
> … Berlin Woodwinds Revive is the new Berlin Woodwinds - it is better sounding, offers more articulations, more flexibility, contains a new Alto Flute and enhances the potential for blending because of new mic perspectives.
> Our original Berlin Woodwinds from 2012 is now called Berlin Woodwinds Legacy.








The New Berlin Woodwinds Revive - New Demo!


The New Berlin Woodwinds Revive Hi Folks! Some time has passed since we released our well-known Berlin Woodwinds in 2012. At this time we didn't imagine it would become the nucleus of one of the biggest orchestral sampling collections of all times - The Berlin Series. The idea of the Berlin...




vi-control.net





Also, I don’t think you can buy the Legacy version as such anymore. If I recall correctly, it was dropped shortly after Revive was released.

Best,

Geoff


----------



## Henu (Nov 25, 2021)

As far as I'm concerned, they sell only the newer package now which used to be labelled as "Revive", which is just now called "Berlin Woodwinds". The "Legacy" package has been taken off completely. The upgrade path is only for those who still have Legacy and never upgraded to Revive in the first place.

But if you want Legacy now? Can you buy it? That's another question.

It looks like they haven't ported Legacy to Sine at all for obvious reasons but I _think_ (which I can't confirm as I own it already and thus can't try to buy it again) that if you buy BWW today for _Kontakt_ it will get you the both packages which used to be referred as "Revive" and "Legacy".

EDIT: what Geoff said plus the possible workaround.


----------



## Henu (Nov 25, 2021)

Btw,


Soundbed said:


> Their store looks like you’re purchasing Legacy when you buy Kontakt, and separately, Revive is an upgrade fee that will not work without purchasing Legacy first. I can sort it with OT support.


I think it's just basically "scare-tactics". 

You're not purchasing LEGACY- you're purchasing Revive. But due to being a Kontakt library, it isn't updated anymore because they have moved to Sine. And the really, _really_ want you to move to Sine so they warn you that this Kontakt product is bad and old and whatever and you should really want the Sine version instead. Because Sine is super and cures cancer and whatnot.


----------



## Russell Anderson (Nov 25, 2021)

Hey @Cory Pelizzari , you really knocked it out on your Infinite demo, man. Every time I come back to your demo specifically, I feel like I can just buy IW as my first and only woodwind library and have a great time. CSW would be easier to use as I’ve only got a modwheel, and might save some time on expression, but the instruments sound great in IW!


----------



## Mr Greg G (Nov 25, 2021)

@Soundbed here are 3 snippets with the same exact midi data copied over the 3 tracks.

They feature Dynamic range from 0 to 50 for the first line, 0 to 127 for the 2nd line and some fast legatos at the end. I was about to type which one is which but sometime it's better to choose based on our ears instead of a dev reputation.

01
View attachment 01.mp3


02
View attachment 02.mp3


03
View attachment 03.mp3


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 25, 2021)

Mr Pringles said:


> @Soundbed here are 3 snippets with the same exact midi data copied over the 3 tracks.
> 
> They feature Dynamic range from 0 to 50 for the first line, 0 to 127 for the 2nd line and some fast legatos at the end. I was about to type which one is which but sometime it's better to choose based on our ears instead of a dev reputation.
> 
> ...


Thanks!! Well ... none of them suck.

My initial impressions:

The first one is a bit "plain" relatively, but perfectly usable. It's the most "wallflower" of the three but not bad. I'd give this up first and only come back if I needed absolute consistency. Or maybe it does runs better, or something.

The second has some interesting "overblown" harmonic flips, cannot recall the best technical term. They catch my ear and make it feel quite expressive esp if it were an exposed solo part, and less robotic. There's a bit of "I can hear the samples crossfading" happening, maybe, or tricks on my ears. This is sort of the "special" one.

The third is sort of in between the other two, with a wide dynamic range I'd probably look at reigning in (if this were the only audio I had). It has a nice "flutey" quality on the repeated section at the end. If I could only have one this seems like the "workhorse" of the three for me.


----------



## NoamL (Nov 25, 2021)

I can clearly hear #1 has lots more close mic compared to the others that are more balanced in their mix... which should give a hint of which library #1 is... 

I agree with @Soundbed that #2 has some "flighty" legato transitions, they might be appropriate in a very lyrical passage. That's my guess for SSW.


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 25, 2021)

Henu said:


> Btw,
> 
> I think it's just basically "scare-tactics".
> 
> You're not purchasing LEGACY- you're purchasing Revive. But due to being a Kontakt library, it isn't updated anymore because they have moved to Sine. And the really, _really_ want you to move to Sine so they warn you that this Kontakt product is bad and old and whatever and you should really want the Sine version instead. Because Sine is super and cures cancer and whatnot.


I see. Well... if nothing else I guess I've learned that if I pull the trigger on BWW then I'll buy the Kontakt version now, and maybe upgrade to SINE for the add'l 10% someday.


----------



## Mr Greg G (Nov 25, 2021)

NoamL said:


> I can clearly hear #1 has lots more close mic compared to the others that are more balanced in their mix... which should give a hint of which library #1 is...


Haha, I actually backed the closed mics almost all the way down because it sounded too dry indeed. Good catch!



Soundbed said:


> Thanks!! Well ... none of them suck.
> 
> My initial impressions:
> 
> ...


Exactly my thoughts, I think your analysis is spot on! And you're right about the crossfading for the 2nd example, I could see it on the waveform of the mixdown.

The library names :


01/ b - Flute Solo (Spitfire Studio WW Pro)
02/ CSW Solo Flute (Cinematic Studio Winds)
03/ 04 Flute True Legato (Cinewinds Core)

These were the ones at hand, I'd need to power up my slave comp to fire up Berlin and VSL.


----------



## QuiteAlright (Nov 25, 2021)

Mr Pringles said:


> Haha, I actually backed the closed mics almost all the way down because it sounded too dry indeed. Good catch!
> 
> 
> Exactly my thoughts, I think your analysis is spot on! And you're right about the crossfading for the 2nd example, I could see it on the waveform of the mixdown.
> ...


This is super helpful. If you do have some extra time, I'd love to hear the Berlin and VSL versions as well 😃


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 25, 2021)

Mr Pringles said:


> I'd need to power up my slave comp to fire up [X] and [Y]





QuiteAlright said:


> This is super helpful. If you do have some extra time, I'd love to hear the [OTHERS] versions as well 😃


Don't give it away! :D

Yes I'd like to hear "the others" as well if you get a chance.


----------



## QuiteAlright (Nov 25, 2021)

Soundbed said:


> Don't give it away! :D
> 
> Yes I'd like to hear "the others" as well if you get a chance.


Hahaha, good call! Edited my post to hide the "other" options. I was just discussing a while ago that direct comparisons with the same notes (but different CC automations) are the best way in my opinion to compare libraries. I find that you can make a great sounding demo of almost anything with enough skill, but with some libraries it will take a lot more work than others.


----------



## Mr Greg G (Nov 25, 2021)

Soundbed said:


> Yes I'd like to hear "the others" as well if you get a chance.


Sure I'll do that tomorrow (almost bed time here)


----------



## Christopher Rocky (Nov 25, 2021)

This has been a great thread to lurk, thanks for @Soundbed for starting it!
I have to say though, I am really impressed with @Mr Pringles 3rd example! overall it sounds the best to me in terms of lyrical. and the 2nd one, not so good, whats with the fast note slurring at the example at the end? like a portamento? 

I have another newer library, when I get time this weekend I'll share a sample for comparison too

I'm leaning towards infinite or CSW at this point. BWW seems to be in a bit of a mess with sine and I cant even download it currently due to the sine player d/l speed is excruciating slow, I've contacted support and it seems to be a problem with the the player and the OS for some people.


----------



## jamwerks (Nov 25, 2021)

I have pretty much every WW library, and am planning to pick-up Infinite if they do a BF sale. By how Infinite are made, they seem very nimble (like real players), for gracenotes, tremolos and acrobatic figures.


----------



## Obi-Wan Spaghetti (Nov 25, 2021)

Mr Pringles said:


> Haha, I actually backed the closed mics almost all the way down because it sounded too dry indeed. Good catch!
> 
> 
> Exactly my thoughts, I think your analysis is spot on! And you're right about the crossfading for the 2nd example, I could see it on the waveform of the mixdown.
> ...


My thought was that #2 was CSW because the transition is juts better with no leftover obstructing the transition. Not surprised here. The guys a CS are so reliable. Very cool. Thanks for this example.


----------



## biomuse (Nov 26, 2021)

@Mr Pringles cinewinds & cinewinds pro are my primary winds library and I’ve been quite happy with them - would you “upgrade” to BWW or CSW? Is all that much gained?


----------



## Casiquire (Nov 26, 2021)

novaburst said:


> It comes with legacy, only





Soundbed said:


> This seems to answer it. If I buy it today for Kontakt I will need to pay the cross grade price to get revive. As of Nov 18, 2021
> 
> 
> 
> ...




No the kontakt version came with both libraries. The SINE version is only Revive. The Upgrade is only for people who bought BWW *before* Revive came out. Those people need to first upgrade to Revive and then they can get BWW in SINE since there's so little sample overlap


----------



## Mr Greg G (Nov 26, 2021)

biomuse said:


> @Mr Pringles cinewinds & cinewinds pro are my primary winds library and I’ve been quite happy with them - would you “upgrade” to BWW or CSW? Is all that much gained?


It depends if you're fed up with Cinewinds sound or not. If you are, yes these libraries will add colors to your sonic palette, yes. Otherwise, don't bother until you are  Cinewinds is in my top 2.


----------



## novaburst (Nov 26, 2021)

Casiquire said:


> No the kontakt version came with both libraries.


Yes this is what i meant to say, so not yet ported over to Sine if so seems legacy will not be a part of Sine


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 26, 2021)

Still haven’t pulled the trigger on BWW. In the meantime I picked up Popelka Bassoon and Herring Clarinet. 😂


----------



## Mr Greg G (Nov 26, 2021)

Soundbed said:


> Still haven’t pulled the trigger on BWW. In the meantime I picked up Popelka Bassoon and Herring Clarinet. 😂


I will have time tomorrow to do a quick blind test with BWW if you’re interested. What are you mainly looking for in a Woodwinds library so I can tailor the test?


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 26, 2021)

Mr Pringles said:


> I will have time tomorrow to do a quick blind test with BWW if you’re interested. What are you mainly looking for in a Woodwinds library so I can tailor the test?


Thanks! Well your last demo was pretty good. 

I might be able to come up with some MIDI.


----------



## QuiteAlright (Nov 26, 2021)

Mr Pringles said:


> I will have time tomorrow to do a quick blind test with BWW if you’re interested. What are you mainly looking for in a Woodwinds library so I can tailor the test?


If I may, I think reusing the same MIDI again from the last test would be most helpful. That way we can compare it directly to the ones from that round (which I won't mention the names of again to avoid spoiling it 😉 )


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 26, 2021)

Well here's some MIDI. I liked the last round but on the other hand this file exercises a bit more range yet still can be moved into octaves appropriate for all (or most) of the instruments.


----------



## Mr Greg G (Nov 27, 2021)

I kept your MIDI file intact, so these are how libraries are performing with the exact same MIDI informations. It can show you how loose some libraries are compared to others.

Flutes (legato patches only, no programming):

01
View attachment 01.mp3

02
View attachment 02.mp3

03
View attachment 03.mp3

04
View attachment 04.mp3

05
View attachment 05.mp3


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 27, 2021)

Mr Pringles said:


> I kept your MIDI file intact, so these are how libraries are performing with the exact same MIDI informations. It can show you how loose some libraries are compared to others.
> 
> Flutes:
> 
> ...


Oh thank you!! I know it's a hassle, but any chance you could do oboe and clarinet as well?


----------



## Mr Greg G (Nov 27, 2021)

Oboe (legato patches only, no programming):

01
View attachment 01.mp3

02
View attachment 02.mp3

03
View attachment 03.mp3

04
View attachment 04.mp3

05
View attachment 05.mp3


----------



## Mr Greg G (Nov 27, 2021)

Soundbed said:


> Oh thank you!! I know it's a hassle, but any chance you could do oboe and clarinet as well?


Beat you to it


----------



## Mr Greg G (Nov 27, 2021)

06
View attachment 06.mp3


----------



## Mr Greg G (Nov 27, 2021)

Clarinet (Legato patches, no prog):
01
View attachment 01.mp3

02
View attachment 02.mp3

03
View attachment 03.mp3

04
View attachment 04.mp3

05
View attachment 05.mp3


----------



## Mr Greg G (Nov 27, 2021)

06
View attachment 06.mp3


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 27, 2021)

wow this is more fun than Christmas morning!


----------



## Zanshin (Nov 27, 2021)

Soundbed said:


> wow this is more fun than Christmas morning!


Uhhh not more fun than Festivus though.


----------



## Mr Greg G (Nov 27, 2021)

Man I got to check Oboe #2 this one glitched for some reason


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 27, 2021)

Mr Pringles said:


> Man I got to check Oboe #2 this one glitched for some reason


Yeah I thought it was my playback.

Several are glitching I guess. I am hearing what I need to hear for the most part but it might good "for posterity" if you want to fix.

Clarinets #2 and #6


----------



## Mr Greg G (Nov 27, 2021)

The samples should be fixed. Now I have some debugging to do


----------



## zwhita (Nov 27, 2021)

For BWW, I'm going to guess Flute #1, Oboe #5, Clarinet #3


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 27, 2021)

zwhita said:


> For BWW, I'm going to guess Flute #1, Oboe #5, Clarinet #3


I have no idea. But of those, the oboe is so much "brighter" than the flute or clarinet. Curious to find out, but I can wait until the appropriate amount of time has passed ... for a reveal.


----------



## Casiquire (Nov 27, 2021)

I think it's clear which are CSW, with how off rhythm they are. I'm not sure i can guess the others


----------



## muziksculp (Nov 27, 2021)

Would you take this POLL results seriously ?


----------



## Casiquire (Nov 27, 2021)

muziksculp said:


> Would you take this POLL results seriously ?


I've learned not to over the years. People tend to vote for the libraries they have; it's more a sign of how many people own something than anything else. 

I can't forget the Octopath strings thread where there was something clearly wrong with the CSS mix and it sounded objectively awful but everyone was voting for it anyway lol


----------



## muziksculp (Nov 27, 2021)

Casiquire said:


> I've learned not to over the years. People tend to vote for the libraries they have; it's more a sign of how many people own something than anything else.
> 
> I can't forget the Octopath strings thread where there was something clearly wrong with the CSS mix and it sounded objectively awful but everyone was voting for it anyway lol


I agree. 100%.


----------



## muziksculp (Nov 27, 2021)

i.e. I have heard Spitfire Symphonic Woodwinds demos in a full arrangement they sound awesome, provided they are used properly. How can they be at the bottom results of the Poll ?


----------



## Evans (Nov 27, 2021)

muziksculp said:


> i.e. I have heard Spitfire Symphonic Woodwinds demos in a full arrangement they sound awesome, provided they are used properly. How can they be at the bottom results of the Poll ?


There's some excessive vibrato, and I think that many people who would like SSW would also like BWW... and that's a tough one to beat.


----------



## jbuhler (Nov 27, 2021)

Casiquire said:


> I've learned not to over the years. People tend to vote for the libraries they have; it's more a sign of how many people own something than anything else.
> 
> I can't forget the Octopath strings thread where there was something clearly wrong with the CSS mix and it sounded objectively awful but everyone was voting for it anyway lol


People own the libraries they do because at some point they made a choice. So it’s not completely divorced from the question, but I have to agree that these polls don’t report data much different from the poll: which of these libraries do you own?


----------



## HM_Music (Nov 27, 2021)

There are csw and berlin woodwinds.
I would choose berlin.
I think spitfire and infinity are also very good choices, but I haven't tried those.
But I definitely wouldn't choose east west.


----------



## HM_Music (Nov 27, 2021)

I don't like the crosfade on CSW that changes the dynamic layers, I don't know if it sounds better in this update, but I haven't updated since I need to finish an old project.

View attachment Mixdown.mp3


----------



## Zanshin (Nov 27, 2021)

Casiquire said:


> I've learned not to over the years. People tend to vote for the libraries they have; it's more a sign of how many people own something than anything else.
> 
> I can't forget the Octopath strings thread where there was something clearly wrong with the CSS mix and it sounded objectively awful but everyone was voting for it anyway lol


So much tribalism around these parts. It amazes me when they just can't believe you don't like XXXX, and there must be something wrong with you. They will pull out the names, well it's in such and such's template, it must be good, and you must be wrong!


----------



## AMBi (Nov 27, 2021)

Casiquire said:


> I can't forget the Octopath strings thread where there was something clearly wrong with the CSS mix and it sounded objectively awful but everyone was voting for it anyway lol


To be fair, it wasn't really CSS's fault it sounded so off in the thread.
The OP did an awkward EQ job and someone in the replies did a much better version including other CS instruments which ended up being one of the better sounding takes on it.


----------



## Casiquire (Nov 27, 2021)

AMBi said:


> To be fair, it wasn't really CSS's fault it sounded so off in the thread.
> The OP did an awkward EQ job and someone in the replies did a much better version including other CS instruments which ended up being one of the better sounding takes on it.


No i actually totally agree! That's the part that interested me so much. The poll was about which example sounded the best, and people didn't even listen to the examples before just voting for the one they had. You're entirely correct.

I'm never afraid to call myself out and yeah, i voted for BWW here because it's the only one I own lol


----------



## AMBi (Nov 27, 2021)

Casiquire said:


> No i actually totally agree! That's the part that interested me so much. The poll was about which example sounded the best, and people didn't even listen to the examples before just voting for the one they had. You're entirely correct


Yeah the initial CSS example was ummm.....yeah
When someone pointed out it sounded like bees humming the tune I couldn't unhear it!

I think I recall specifically not voting since a lot of the examples had one thing or another going against them which made for unflattering results in many of the libraries.


----------



## Trash Panda (Nov 27, 2021)

Zanshin said:


> So much tribalism around these parts. It amazes me when they just can't believe you don't like XXXX, and there must be something wrong with you. They will pull out the names, well it's in such and such's template, it must be good, and you must be wrong!


Say something bad about BBCSO or Performance Samples, prep some popcorn and enjoy the show.


----------



## Obi-Wan Spaghetti (Nov 27, 2021)

HM_Music said:


> I don't like the crosfade on CSW that changes the dynamic layers, I don't know if it sounds better in this update, but I haven't updated since I need to finish an old project.
> 
> View attachment Mixdown.mp3


Can you make it longer? Didn't really hear it.


----------



## Obi-Wan Spaghetti (Nov 27, 2021)

I suspect some poeple voted because they prefer csw GUI because they're familiar with it. Works like CSS and it sounds good? Great that the one i want...


----------



## Tralen (Nov 27, 2021)

jbuhler said:


> People own the libraries they do because at some point they made a choice. So it’s not completely divorced from the question, but I have to agree that these polls don’t report data much different from the poll: which of these libraries do you own?


I don't know. If that was the case, I believe Spitfire and EW would be higher on the poll.


----------



## Casiquire (Nov 27, 2021)

Tralen said:


> I don't know. If that was the case, I believe Spitfire and EW would be higher on the poll.


True, being able to pick only one means that everyone who owns multiple would actually result in the favorite one winning. I think a lot of people who have Opus or Hollywood Winds probably use something else instead, so in that sense there's at least a little bit of accuracy to it.


----------



## Christopher Rocky (Nov 28, 2021)

adding something different for comparison: 

Flute
View attachment flute1.mp3


Clarinet
View attachment clarinet1.mp3


Oboe
View attachment Oboe.mp3


Spoiler:
Audio Imperia SOLO


----------



## Christopher Rocky (Nov 28, 2021)

I Don't think these have been posted yet either

Flute1

View attachment FluteS1.mp3


Flute2

View attachment FluteSS1.mp3


Spoiler: 
flute 1 Spitfire symphonic mics (c/t/a) flute 2 Spitfire Studio Pro mic (c1/t1/o)


----------



## Casiquire (Nov 28, 2021)

Christopher Rocky said:


> I Don't think these have been posted yet either
> 
> Flute1
> 
> ...


The second one sounds better to my ears. Do those winds often get criticized or just those strings? Because that flute sounded pretty good to me


----------



## Mr Greg G (Nov 28, 2021)

Flutes:
01/ Berlin WW
02/ Spitfire Studio Woodwinds Pro
03/ VSL Woodwinds I
04/ CineWinds Core
05/ Cinematic Studio Winds

Oboe:
01/ CineWinds Core
02/ Berlin WW (Oboe 2)
03/ Spitfire Studio Woodwinds Pro
04/ Cinematic Studio Winds
05/ Berlin WW
06/ CineWinds Core (Oboe 2)

Clarinet:
01/ Cinematic Studio Winds
02/ Spitfire Studio Woodwinds Pro
03/ Berlin WW
04/ Symphobia 3 Lumina
05/ CineWinds Core
06/ Berlin WW (Clarinet 2)


----------



## Mr Greg G (Nov 28, 2021)

Audio Imperia stuff sounds _really_ great, the programming is top notch but their sample libraries lack real (recorded) low dynamics, CC1 is just a second CC11 unfortunately.


----------



## Mr Greg G (Nov 28, 2021)

I chose to keep CineWinds and CSW in my template and dive in the other libraries if these two don't respond well to the phrase I'm writing/programming. But I almost never do.


----------



## Casiquire (Nov 28, 2021)

Mr Pringles said:


> I chose to keep CineWinds and CSW in my template and dive in the other libraries if these two don't respond well to the phrase I'm writing/programming. But I almost never do.


Those are good choices and i feel like the room sounds are similar enough that they don't take much hair-pulling to use together


----------



## Trash Panda (Nov 28, 2021)

Mr Pringles said:


> Audio Imperia stuff sounds _really_ great, the programming is top notch but their sample libraries lack real (recorded) low dynamics, CC1 is just a second CC11 unfortunately.


Only in the Solo legato patches.


----------



## Mr Greg G (Nov 28, 2021)

Casiquire said:


> Those are good choices and i feel like the room sounds are similar enough that they don't take much hair-pulling to use together


True, they do sound quite alike. They're also quite expressive. The hair pulling may come from CSW programming because it often doesn't chase CC1 values for rep shorts which instead triggers legatos when playing back, and the legato patch is not as tight as the other libraries like you already mentioned.


----------



## Mr Greg G (Nov 28, 2021)

Trash Panda said:


> Only in the Solo legato patches.


Yes not for the shorts but I would say "Only in legato patches", not just Solo.


----------



## pawelmorytko (Nov 28, 2021)

Casiquire said:


> I've learned not to over the years. People tend to vote for the libraries they have; it's more a sign of how many people own something than anything else.
> 
> I can't forget the Octopath strings thread where there was something clearly wrong with the CSS mix and it sounded objectively awful but everyone was voting for it anyway lol


That is a very good point, but then again, if you only have one woodwinds library and you love it to bits, it sounds great, it's easy to work with and you never feel like you need to buy another one, then surely you can vote for that one, even if it's the only one you own?

But I do get your point and agree, maybe people should only vote on these type of polls if they actually own all of the mentioned libraries in the poll... but I don't think there's that many mad psychopaths going around who go out and buy all of CSW, BWW, SSW, East West WW and IW so we probably wouldn't get many votes


----------



## Casiquire (Nov 28, 2021)

pawelmorytko said:


> but I don't think there's that many mad psychopaths going around who go out and buy all of CSW, BWW, SSW, East West WW and IW so we probably wouldn't get many votes


[3/4s of the forum members shuffle uncomfortably]


----------



## Obi-Wan Spaghetti (Nov 28, 2021)

Mr Pringles said:


> Flutes:
> 01/ Berlin WW
> 02/ Spitfire Studio Woodwinds Pro
> 03/ VSL Woodwinds I
> ...


I used your test this morning to see if i could pic up CSW by just listening to the transition(and the room a little bit). I was able to get the oboe and the clarinet right. The clarinet was a close call. But i mixed up the flute with VSL. Couldn't hear a thing last night lol.. Maybe i missed the flute because i hear 2 flutes in the CSW example? I guess you hit 2 velocity with the crossfade. Anyway, that was interesting and i got what i wanted out of your test. Thanks.


----------



## Mr Greg G (Nov 28, 2021)

It's really the solo Flute in CSW but it's true it sounds like 2 which is ... not good.

It's always the same thing, the samples/and or release samples are not stopped when a new note is played so they stack for a short amount of time making it sound fake and synthy.


----------



## Obi-Wan Spaghetti (Nov 28, 2021)

Mr Pringles said:


> It's really the solo Flute in CSW but it's true it sounds like 2 which is ... not good.
> 
> It's always the same thing, the samples/and or release samples are not stopped when a new note is played so they stack for a short amount of time making it sounds fake and synthy.


No i hear it on the sustain portion of the note witch suggest it's a crossfade issue. Unless it's some kind of weird echo in the room? Probably not an issue if you avoid it by dialing the mod wheel so you hear just 1 velocity only. I don't own it so i don't know if it's doable but i would think it is.


----------



## Mr Greg G (Nov 28, 2021)

Obi-Wan Spaghetti said:


> No i hear it on the sustain portion of the note witch suggest it's a crossfade issue. Unless it's some kind of weird echo in the room? Probably not an issue if you avoid it by dialing the mod wheel so you hear just 1 velocity only. I don't own it so i don't know if it's doable but i would think it is.


Yes that can also happen. But if you look at the MIDI provided by soundbed, there are not much CC1 variations. So maybe the dynamics are already stacking even though CC1 value is not changing? 

What I often hear in solo strings libraries is that there is sometime no consistency in the player placement. When I hit one note it sounds like the player is playing on my right monitor, then moves to the left one to play other notes and so on


----------



## Christopher Rocky (Nov 28, 2021)

Casiquire said:


> The second one sounds better to my ears. Do those winds often get criticized or just those strings? Because that flute sounded pretty good to me


Spitfire studio woodwinds is considered one of the best, especially at its price point, I highly recommend the strings and woods Pro versions, not so much the brass. Its not as expressive as solo, its still very straight forward orchestral samples, but just recorded amazingly well in a tight room


SSW Is really great still, it has vib control (as does studio), but like the whole SS series, you need to work with it and it doesn't necessarily translate well moving midi files on the track with out tweaking, unlike SOLO is is just one layer with a performance baked in (like solo winds from OT).

Its crazy this thread has actually put me off CSW a bit. I have enough winds but for exposed winds I think I'll stick with Cine-samples and SOLO


----------



## Casiquire (Nov 28, 2021)

Christopher Rocky said:


> Spitfire studio woodwinds is considered one of the best, especially at its price point, I highly recommend the strings and woods Pro versions, not so much the brass. Its not as expressive as solo, its still very straight forward orchestral samples, but just recorded amazingly well in a tight room
> 
> 
> SSW Is really great still, it has vib control (as does studio), but like the whole SS series, you need to work with it and it doesn't necessarily translate well moving midi files on the track with out tweaking, unlike SOLO is is just one layer with a performance baked in (like solo winds from OT).
> ...


I have yet to jump on the Spitfire train. If i do, it'll likely be for BBC. I agree with you though, the winds sound great. I like the sound of the strings but other people's opinions on them are pretty mixed--i think it has to fit the style you're going for more than most libraries


----------



## Christopher Rocky (Nov 28, 2021)

Casiquire said:


> I have yet to jump on the Spitfire train. If i do, it'll likely be for BBC. I agree with you though, the winds sound great. I like the sound of the strings but other people's opinions on them are pretty mixed--i think it has to fit the style you're going for more than most libraries


BBC woodwinds are also really fantastic! I was going to add that to the demos, I can do it as well when I get time


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 28, 2021)

BWW


Christopher Rocky said:


> BBC woodwinds are also really fantastic! I was going to add that to the demos, I can do it as well when I get time


That would be nice, to round out the selection!



Christopher Rocky said:


> thread has actually put me off CSW a bit


What has put you off about them? If it's the timing, there's a switch to use "low latency" which puts everything on time, with simpler legato transitions that also sound good usually. If it's phasing across dynamics layers, most people simply play as usual, but if there's an ugly crossfade, to edit by picking one dynamic layer and using volume for a note or two, then switching dynamic layers when it's less noticeable. Not as bad as it sounds, and arguably a nice alternative to phase aligned packages (which also exist, like Infinite Woodwinds). I've been conflicted about CSW but I've been learning to work around the issues and the end result sounds quite good with a diminishing amount of effort, for me.


----------



## muziksculp (Nov 28, 2021)

PLUS.. CSW has some bugs that have not been fixed by Cinematic Studio for quite a long time now. Shame. Poor service by developer.


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 28, 2021)

Obi-Wan Spaghetti said:


> i hear 2 flutes in the CSW example





Mr Pringles said:


> the solo Flute in CSW but it's true it sounds like 2 which is ... not good





Obi-Wan Spaghetti said:


> i hear it on the sustain portion of the note witch suggest it's a crossfade issue





Obi-Wan Spaghetti said:


> Probably not an issue if you avoid it by dialing the mod wheel so you hear just 1 velocity only





Mr Pringles said:


> maybe the dynamics are already stacking even though CC1 value is not changing


yes this is a common complaint I've read and experienced with CSW.

there are points even with the solo flute where you'll hear two flutes as you move the mod wheel into an area where two dynamic layers start sounding on a sustained note.

and yes the "fix" is to adjust the mod wheel so only one dynamic layer is playing and use volume to introduce phrasing, then mod wheel into another dynamic layer whenever it's going to be less noticeable.


----------



## Christopher Rocky (Nov 28, 2021)

@Soundbed I didnt know that about CSW and the timing issue, I was wondering why they were so horribly out of time in all the examples.

This flute example here from @Mr Pringles earlier, where the fast notes are towards the end, can that be fixed? it sounds horrible to my ears. I've also noticed that CSW is slightly out of tune in whats been showcased here compared to the others, is that normal too? Just seems like too much wrong with it to bother, for me personally I think I'm covered.

I have also been worried about the phase issues with infinite winds and brass,
I guess its the trade off to having the flexibility to play something more realistic.
But wow, would not want to have to sort out a 12 horns line and worry about phasing every time you playback, you could print to audio until they all dont phase at any particular point, but that seems like another hassle.



Mr Pringles said:


> @Soundbed here are 3 snippets with the same exact midi data copied over the 3 tracks.
> 
> They feature Dynamic range from 0 to 50 for the first line, 0 to 127 for the 2nd line and some fast legatos at the end. I was about to type which one is which but sometime it's better to choose based on our ears instead of a dev reputation.
> 
> ...


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 28, 2021)

Christopher Rocky said:


> where the fast notes are towards the end, can that be fixed


yes just switch to low latency legato (or use the marcato patch for very fast runs like in CSS)



Christopher Rocky said:


> CSW is slightly out of tune


yes it's tuned "by ear" but the worst samples were fixed in the most recent update. (@Mr Pringles are you using the latest?)

it's a tradeoff to have something where the tuning is not ultra perfect — can be a nice human flavor —and yet ... if a good flautist was playing in an ensemble (esp if the ensemble was perfectly playing with just intonation, like, sampled) the good flautist wouldn't knowingly play OUT of tune with the others. it's caused some debate in the CSW thread. there's even a post suggesting all the ranges to tune differently to make it more just intonation-y. but @ism has demonstrated time and again in practice that it really can work depending on your writing and how you use it. in other words if the flute or piccolo are doubling perfectly tuned parts played by other instruments, I imagine eventually they will potentially sound 'out of tune' ... But if you play musical lines in context they seem to sound lifelike and natural. ymmv


Christopher Rocky said:


> phase issues with infinite winds and brass





Christopher Rocky said:


> would not want to have to sort out a 12 horns line


yeah I haven't used IB or IW for ensemble work myself yet. I'm going to start using them at what they seem best at: tackling expressions I haven't gotten other sampled libraries to perform, mostly when there's lots of note attacks or note transitions that need sculpting. these tasks seem very suited to beginner Infinite Wind / Brass "performers". Over time one might learn how to make believable sustained notes sound alive (or maybe it's just easier with a breath controller or some other multi control input device ... using only the mod wheel isn't quite enough and you ultimately "perform" the intimate series in my explorations so far).


----------



## Christopher Rocky (Nov 28, 2021)

@Soundbed Thanks for the detailed insight  So CSW was purposefully recorded by ear? that is super interesting about playing in an ensemble. making synth patches with wave layers that are slightly out of tune have a pleasant effect. I never thought about that translated to an orchestra..

I have seen a video of a guy using infinite brass with the breath controller and it was absolutely mind blowing what it can do. nothing that a sample library can do that's for sure


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 28, 2021)

Mr Pringles said:


> Flutes:
> 01/ Berlin WW
> 02/ Spitfire Studio Woodwinds Pro
> 03/ VSL Woodwinds I
> ...


i may skip BWW and get Spitfire Studio!! it sounds more like what i want plus a very singing vibrato. do i need pro? hope not. oh crap i probably do.

i have AI SOLO which is capable too. but what i was looking for in BWW i am hearing a bit more in Spitfire Studio WW -- surprising!


Christopher Rocky said:


> So CSW was purposefully recorded by ear?


iirc i read that it was "tuned by ear" whatever that means. and recall something about trying to preserve the way the players actually would play, then remembering how players tend to drift sharp in the upper upper registers in a real orchestra (a whole set of debates and conversations there) but of course if it sounds out of tune in a piece its out of tune right? so... i can see both sides. plus i don't hear it while listening to @ism 's music


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 29, 2021)

As I read old threads on Spitfire Studio WW it seems a lot of folks recommend Chris Hein for WW... anyone have them to throw the same MIDI at?


----------



## Mr Greg G (Nov 29, 2021)

Christopher Rocky said:


> @Soundbed I didnt know that about CSW and the timing issue, I was wondering why they were so horribly out of time in all the examples.
> 
> This flute example here from @Mr Pringles earlier, where the fast notes are towards the end, can that be fixed? it sounds horrible to my ears. I've also noticed that CSW is slightly out of tune in whats been showcased here compared to the others, is that normal too? Just seems like too much wrong with it to bother, for me personally I think I'm covered.
> 
> ...


Like Mr Soundbed said, you can fix the timing issue with other articulations, or I just move the MIDI notes accordingly or switch to fast legato mode (it was in auto mode in the example).

I really like their expressiveness, that’s why I use this library but it’s true it can force you to work against it. Cinewinds is still my #1.

Regarding the tuning, I don’t think there’s an issue with the library, it’s in range in what I can expect from a good human woodwind player. It’s nothing like LASS divisis that truly sound horrible.


----------



## Mr Greg G (Nov 29, 2021)

Soundbed said:


> i may skip BWW and get Spitfire Studio!! it sounds more like what i want plus a very singing vibrato. do i need pro? hope not. oh crap i probably do.
> 
> i have AI SOLO which is capable too. but what i was looking for in BWW i am hearing a bit more in Spitfire Studio WW -- surprising!


The never ending Quest! What do you like about Spitfire WW exactly?


----------



## RogiervG (Nov 29, 2021)

Soundbed said:


> As I read old threads on Spitfire Studio WW it seems a lot of folks recommend Chris Hein for WW... anyone have them to throw the same MIDI at?


I do have chris hein, but hmm not installed atm. (since i don't like the sound character much: nasal, mono etc)


----------



## Christopher Rocky (Nov 29, 2021)

@Mr Pringles sounds like CSW has some quirks, I guess i'm used to quirks using mainly spitfire libraries. But i'm gonna hold off for now, I think if anything you have reminded me how awesome cinesamples is still.

@Soundbed spitfire studio woodwinds you can get away with not using pro, but you do get extra instruments too, imo it is worth the extra mics for sure. I would suggest though if you were thinking about the strings, the version HAS to be pro


----------



## Trash Panda (Nov 29, 2021)

Christopher Rocky said:


> I have also been worried about the phase issues with infinite winds and brass,
> I guess its the trade off to having the flexibility to play something more realistic.
> But wow, would not want to have to sort out a 12 horns line and worry about phasing every time you playback, you could print to audio until they all dont phase at any particular point, but that seems like another hassle.


What phase issues in Infinite?


----------



## Mr Greg G (Nov 29, 2021)

Christopher Rocky said:


> I think if anything you have reminded me how awesome cinesamples is still.


If only their Strings library was half as good as their Brass and Woodwinds counterpart!!


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 29, 2021)

Trash Panda said:


> What phase issues in Infinite?


I believe he’s talking about the scenario he mentioned; “to sort out a 12 horns line and worry about phasing every time you playback, you could print to audio until they all dont phase at any particular point”


----------



## RogiervG (Nov 29, 2021)

I don't get the poll result (as per this moment in time). only 6% likes SSW if he/she has to choose?
That is contra, what people tell ,in many threads (SSW is a good library, nice sound, blablablabla)... vs the many issues i read about CSW (phasing).. so logically they should be very close to eachother percentage wise (more upvotes for ssw, and lesser csw). This as an example ofcourse.. the other results are also kind of weird, and unexpected (e.g. IW only 9%, while you mostly read positive/raving reviews/opinions here)
Seems more a popularity poll (i have bought a new toy, so i vote that.), or maybe some parrot voters too (i know this and that well known person uses it, or likes it, so it must be the best: voted), than a real honest one, results wise.

Anyway, just little thoughts going through my mind, reading the results...


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 29, 2021)

Mr Pringles said:


> move the MIDI notes accordingly


@Christopher Rocky at the risk of over explaining — CSW is behaving as designed and probably has the most consistent timing of any top tier package out there, but that MIDI part was not written for the default settings, which is why the timing sounded off. 

The default setting uses velocity to choose between three levels of legato transitions. Slow (low velocity) medium and fast (high velocity). 

Each corresponds to legato transition sets taking a precise number of milliseconds. 

To use it as designed in that “out of the box” mode, you would have to either use high velocities on all notes or move the lower velocity note starts earlier by x milliseconds. 

There are scripts and tools to move the note starts based on velocity for this purpose. Or, as I said, flip a switch on the GUI to an always fast transition. 

The MIDI I provided was using velocity in a totally different and more typical way.


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 29, 2021)

RogiervG said:


> I don't get the poll result (as per this moment in time). only 6% likes SSW if he/she has to choose?
> That is contra, what people tell ,in many threads (SSW is a good library, nice sound, blablablabla)... vs the many issues i read about CSW (phasing).. so logically they should be very close to eachother percentage wise (more upvotes for ssw, and lesser csw). This as an example ofcourse.. the other results are also kind of weird, and unexpected (e.g. IW only 9%, while you mostly read positive/raving reviews/opinions here)
> Seems more a popularity poll (i have bought a new toy, so i vote that.), or maybe some parrot voters too (i know this and that well known person uses it, or likes it, so it must be the best: voted), than a real honest one, results wise.
> 
> Anyway, just little thoughts going through my mind, reading the results...


I think CSW is interesting because it often sounds great in orchestral context but not so great under a microscope.


----------



## Jonathan Moray (Nov 29, 2021)

@Christopher Rocky, can you post an audio example of the phasing problems you're having with IB? I feel as if they are generally minimal and very rarely invasive. Since phasing occurs as a natural phenomenon (but reality is much more complex than recorded audio) it's not inherently bad, but the digital phasing we often associate with misaligned samples is rather horrendous, but I don't get too much of that in IB or IW.

Here's something I made a while ago when testing out a simple Horns a12 patch to see what it would sound like. No individual lines, just everything played on the same audio track and rendered. It's not the best, but I hear very little phasing, and this was before the big 1.6 update. I could probably get it sounding a bit better if I did it today.

Sorry to hijack the thread.


----------



## gst98 (Nov 29, 2021)

RogiervG said:


> I don't get the poll result (as per this moment in time). only 6% likes SSW if he/she has to choose?
> That is contra, what people tell ,in many threads (SSW is a good library, nice sound, blablablabla)... vs the many issues i read about CSW.. so logically they should be very close to eachother percentage wise (more upvotes for ssw, and lesser csw). This as an example ofcourse.. the other results are also kind of weird, and unexpected (e.g. IW only 9%, while you mostly read positive/raving reviews/opinions here)
> Seems more a popularity poll (i have bought a new toy, so i vote that.), or maybe some parrot voters too (i know this and that well known person uses it, or likes it, so it must be the best: voted), than a real honest one, results wise.


You're just overplaying the criticisms of CSW. They are very subtle and have more to do with tuning or the fact that they are studio vs the big halls of BWW and SWW. Just the same way people criticise CSS for being dark and recording in a small stage - doesn't mean many don't love it. By now it may be the most popular string library out there.

CSW still has a legato far more capable than SSW and BWW, not only for slower passages but also doesn't get caught out by fast playing - crucial for WW writing. The marc/stac legato makes it playable the same way of sample modelling of infinite ww.

SSW has a pretty nice legato, better than BWW, but lacks the articulations of BWW. Then again, SSW has more variety of instruments that are lacking in BWW. CSW has all the variety of SSW, nearly all the artics of BWW and far superior editing and is consistently edited to their brass and strings. Only thing is the studio sound. Is it any surprise people like it?



Soundbed said:


> I think CSW is interesting because it often sounds great in orchestral context but not so great under a microscope.


Personally, I'd disagree with that completely. The fact that it has the most consistent and tightest editing and legato means you'd be much more likely to spotlight a CSW soloist than one from BWW.


----------



## RogiervG (Nov 29, 2021)

gst98 said:


> You're just overplaying the criticisms of CSW. They are very subtle and have more to do with tuning or the fact that they are studio vs the big halls of BWW and SWW. Just the same way people criticise CSS for being dark and recording in a small stage - doesn't mean many don't love it.



Yes, you might be right, i read it too exact. But it's what i notice when reading the discussions, the emphasis on the negatives, compared to the positives.



gst98 said:


> CSW has all the variety of SSW, nearly all the artics of BWW



CSW having more articulations than SSW, i doubt that highly. Since CSW like the rest of the CS series are base articulations only. SSW has many more articulations, maybe not as much as BWW, but close.

Update: CSW and SSW seems to have the same articulations (reading throught the lists), although not for all instruments all articulations are present.


----------



## AEF (Nov 29, 2021)

Mr Pringles said:


> I chose to keep CineWinds and CSW in my template and dive in the other libraries if these two don't respond well to the phrase I'm writing/programming. But I almost never do.


those were the two that won the most for me


----------



## Jonathan Moray (Nov 29, 2021)

RogiervG said:


> I don't get the poll result (as per this moment in time). only 6% likes SSW if he/she has to choose?
> That is contra, what people tell ,in many threads (SSW is a good library, nice sound, blablablabla)... vs the many issues i read about CSW (phasing).. so logically they should be very close to eachother percentage wise (more upvotes for ssw, and lesser csw). This as an example ofcourse.. the other results are also kind of weird, and unexpected (e.g. IW only 9%, while you mostly read positive/raving reviews/opinions here)
> Seems more a popularity poll (i have bought a new toy, so i vote that.), or maybe some parrot voters too (i know this and that well known person uses it, or likes it, so it must be the best: voted), than a real honest one, results wise.
> 
> Anyway, just little thoughts going through my mind, reading the results...


I don't think it's that easy. Part of it is definitely popularity and that will skew the results favourably towards the more popular libraries even if they might not necessarily be better, but I think another thing is expectations.

BWW, SSW, CW (CineWinds), etc are all good sounding libraries but quite inconsistent and can be rather "unpredictable" to work with. BWW, SSW, and CW all have mediocre legato even if they are among the most expensive so people will probably expect more from these very expensive libraries. While CSW is among the cheaper ones and is still extremely consistent with exceptional legato. The phasing comes from the close sound of CSW and because it's dealing with solo instruments. And because of the rest of the Cinematic Studio Series exceptional products, CSW was expected to be absolutely perfect at release, which it wasn't. But even with these faults, it's still among the best library out there. People just had a knee jerk reaction when it came out and it wasn't absolutely perfect, but it's still among the best.

Same with IW. Those that get IW don't get it excepting the tone to be the best judging it against other libraries or real recordings because it's been stated time and time again that the tone could be improved, but it is its agility and flexibility that it gets praised for. So when people get it they have high hopes for just those things and I've yet to see anyone let down by just those criteria. Those that are let down are those going in without reading up on the flaws of the library and excepting (in this case especially the tone) it to be better than it is. But most people hear "bad tone" and just skip the library all together making it less popular.


----------



## jbuhler (Nov 29, 2021)

RogiervG said:


> Yes, you might be right, i read it too exact. But it's what i notice when reading the discussions, the emphasis on the negatives, compared to the positives.
> 
> 
> 
> CSW having more articulations than SSW, i doubt that highly. Since CSW like the rest of the CS series are base articulations only. SSW has many more articulations, maybe not as much as BWW, but close.


Many of the SSW instruments only have basic articulations. The English horn doesn’t even have trills! Only the flutes have what I’d call a robust set of articulations. I love SSW, aside from the solo clarinet, but it doesn’t generally have a large set of articulations.


----------



## RogiervG (Nov 29, 2021)

jbuhler said:


> Many of the SSW instruments only have basic articulations. The English horn doesn’t even have trills! Only the flutes have what I’d call a robust set of articulations. I love SSW, aside from the solo clarinet, but it doesn’t generally have a large set of articulations.


Yes, i've corrected my post, the way each library presents the articulations, made it seem ssw had more.. but it's not


----------



## novaburst (Nov 29, 2021)

I think we must remember that the votes are not showing the issues in library's but are showing the likes and sound about the library, 

I think the fact that users are voting shows that the library's are fine to use despite any type of issue's , 

Can anyone pick a library that has no issues I don't think so VSL are top of the chain when it comes to qualify in usability and and things work great, 

The love for tone richness warmth in other library's especially the Kontakt library's comes at a small price to pay and that is you will get more than your fair share of issue's but as you can clearly see the tone and sound is what people prefer.and appears to out way the issue that users normally find away around the issue.

Must say that Audio bro are on top of solving issues too


----------



## gst98 (Nov 29, 2021)

RogiervG said:


> Yes, you might be right, i read it too exact. But it's what i notice when reading the discussions, the emphasis on the negatives, compared to the positives.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The artic on SSW are all over the place. many only have 4. Even comparing SSW patches with lots of artics, have fewer than CSW. CSW has 4 shorts+marcatos, measured reps, flutters, various legato lengths and runs and overblown artics built into the patches.

Berlin can also be very random in fairness - where bsn1 has differently arts from bsn2 (ffs!!), but sometimes has measured trills, or some short sfz. It does have long and short versions of both marc and portato, but I'd argue that these are all achievable with CSW.


----------



## Tralen (Nov 29, 2021)

RogiervG said:


> I don't get the poll result (as per this moment in time). only 6% likes SSW if he/she has to choose?
> That is contra, what people tell ,in many threads (SSW is a good library, nice sound, blablablabla)... vs the many issues i read about CSW (phasing).. so logically they should be very close to eachother percentage wise (more upvotes for ssw, and lesser csw). This as an example ofcourse.. the other results are also kind of weird, and unexpected (e.g. IW only 9%, while you mostly read positive/raving reviews/opinions here)
> Seems more a popularity poll (i have bought a new toy, so i vote that.), or maybe some parrot voters too (i know this and that well known person uses it, or likes it, so it must be the best: voted), than a real honest one, results wise.
> 
> Anyway, just little thoughts going through my mind, reading the results...


It could also mean that people rave publicly about a library because it is popular, but secretly despise it and vote against it.


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 29, 2021)

gst98 said:


> I'd disagree with that completely. The fact that it has the most consistent and tightest editing and legato means you'd be much more likely to spotlight a CSW soloist than one from BWW.


Sorry for not stating my thought completely.

Yes I think we agree. 

I was trying to say CSW sounds lovely in context (even if that context is a soloist in an orchestra) after you’ve learned any “quirks” and worked around them (as I’ve pointed out).

But out of context if you open it up and play some MIDI that wasn’t written for it, it’s easy to get picky about things you’re hearing that seem like big issues. 

Off topic, I’ve also tried some “jazz flute” with CSW and it works well too.


----------



## RogiervG (Nov 29, 2021)

now i am also considering other ww libs aswel.. hahaha (reading this thread and others)
little more than one day left for many offers... damnit... need to hurry my choices.. 

Thanks VIC, you are making me poor.. hahaha


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 29, 2021)

Tralen said:


> It could also mean that people rave publicly about a library because it is popular, but secretly despise it and vote against it.


On my Facebook poll, BWW is ahead! Followed by CSW.


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 29, 2021)

Mr Pringles said:


> The never ending Quest! What do you like about Spitfire WW exactly?


In your 3 examples with my MIDI, the Spitfire Studio WW Pro had a singing, clear tone and some lovely unexpected vibrato. I didn’t have complaints about the legato per se other than the timing was all over the place. 😅 The dynamics seems in line with other Spitfire libraries in that quiet notes were very quiet. A dynamic range control would do them well if ported to the Spitfire player (to limit dynamic range). Seems like it (SStW) would be a bit of a hassle to deal with overall but I liked the tone and the vibrato. 

Which is baffling because when I looked for threads on them I read about people wanting more vibrato. Generally it seems like a love it or hate it library.


----------



## gst98 (Nov 29, 2021)

Soundbed said:


> But out of context if you open it up and play some MIDI that wasn’t written for it, it’s easy to get picky about things you’re hearing that seem like big issues.


I suppose, depending on what you're feeding into that could be the case. I've had to feed CSW plenty of musicXML and find that the legato is capable of handling nearly anything you throw at it (once the pre-delay script is enabled). If it was BWW, I'd have to massage it and try various short articulations to do fiddley passages and that becomes very time-consuming. For the same reason, if you plug in MIDI written for BWW and all it's idiosyncrasies, then you'd have to do the reverse process.

Overall I find the whole CS range to be the least idiosyncratic (besides predelay that is solvable with a script), especially seeing as with the marcato-leg you can just feed it MIDI and never even have to program in articulations for near-instant results.


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 29, 2021)

gst98 said:


> I've had to feed CSW plenty of musicXML and find that the legato is capable of handling nearly anything you throw at it (once the pre-delay script is enabled).





gst98 said:


> Overall I find the whole CS range to be the least idiosyncratic (besides predelay that is solvable with a script), especially seeing as with the marcato-leg you can just feed it MIDI and never even have to program in articulations for near-instant results.


Yep! These techniques get around what ends up riling people up on first impression, so we are still agreeing.

MusicXML doesn't have mod wheel CC data right? So you wouldn't hear the "two flutes" effect on a solo patch.

And using the pre-delay script or switching to Marcato (or Low-Latency) would "fix" the timing.

Sorry for using the phrase "under the microscope" and not explaining that I meant ... something more like ... "showcasing potential flaws, either intentionally or accidentally, most of which can be worked around, as you get acquainted with the package". e.g., post #124


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 29, 2021)

Mr Pringles said:


> I kept your MIDI file intact, so these are how libraries are performing with the exact same MIDI informations. It can show you how loose some libraries are compared to others.
> 
> Flutes (legato patches only, no programming):
> 
> ...





Mr Pringles said:


> Oboe (legato patches only, no programming):
> 
> 01
> View attachment 01.mp3
> ...





Mr Pringles said:


> 06
> View attachment 06.mp3





Mr Pringles said:


> Clarinet (Legato patches, no prog):
> 01
> View attachment 01.mp3
> 
> ...





Mr Pringles said:


> 06
> View attachment 06.mp3





Mr Pringles said:


> Flutes:
> 01/ Berlin WW
> 02/ Spitfire Studio Woodwinds Pro
> 03/ VSL Woodwinds I
> ...


Can't thank you enough @Mr Pringles for doing this! I've learned a lot about each package from these.



Christopher Rocky said:


> adding something different for comparison:
> 
> Flute
> View attachment flute1.mp3
> ...





Christopher Rocky said:


> I Don't think these have been posted yet either
> 
> Flute1
> 
> ...


Thank you for these, too! I have one of those packages and hadn't been thinking about it for this comparison but putting it in the mix actually helps focus my mind on certain qualities like dynamic variations.


----------



## gst98 (Nov 29, 2021)

Soundbed said:


> Sorry for using the phrase "under the microscope" and not explaining that I meant ... something more like ... "showcasing potential flaws, either intentionally or accidentally, most of which can be worked around, as you get acquainted with the package". e.g., post #124


No worries, I get what you mean now!

My vote was for CSW because I think you would really struggle to find a problem that you couldn't solve. Whereas with BWW I think you'll end up writing to the strengths of the library more. SWW even more so - in classic SF fashion it has great performances of the longs and some great staccs, but isn't very good at blending between the two because attacks for stacc, marc and tentuo (where it has them!) don't match very well. They all have their place, but if I could only pick one it would be CSW (despite my preference being for large halls)

Yeah, you have to add CC to XML but there is velocity so that gives you an indication, as well as covers the short arts.


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 29, 2021)

gst98 said:


> No worries, I get what you mean now!
> 
> My vote was for CSW because I think you would really struggle to find a problem that you couldn't solve. Whereas with BWW I think you'll end up writing to the strengths of the library more. SWW even more so - in classic SF fashion it has great performances of the longs and some great staccs, but isn't very good at blending between the two because attacks for stacc, marc and tentuo (where it has them!) don't match very well. They all have their place, but if I could only pick one it would be CSW (despite my preference being for large halls)
> 
> Yeah, you have to add CC to XML but there is velocity so that gives you an indication, as well as covers the short arts.


Thanks! I still haven't gotten BWW and after all these years of lusting for it I am thinking maybe I don't want to spend for it after all.


----------



## gst98 (Nov 29, 2021)

Soundbed said:


> Thanks! I still haven't gotten BWW and after all these years of lusting for it I am thinking maybe I don't want to spend for it after all.


I don't want to put you off BWW, but of all the sections, ww have the least offerings with probably the most flaws if you compare to the number of string libs on the market. BWW is expensive, and you're mostly buying it for the selection of shorts and trills etc rather than offering you legatos on the level of CSW. I probably won't be satisfied until Voyage ww where you'll get great programming _and_ a great room - unless SF up their game with AR modular.


----------



## Obi-Wan Spaghetti (Nov 29, 2021)

I too think there's a bit of unjustified panic in regard to CSW. These guys don't seem to put out crap so I'm jumping on board the CS train. The fact you can substitue a string line with WW shows dediction to detail i haven't seen before. Plus all that was said above is the reason I'm going that route with confidence. But i was wodering why won't they make an instr. option with 1 velocity layer(like mf?) for legatos? That way everyone should be happy. Seems like it would be fairly easy no? Not saying it wouldn't create other problems but it seems like it would be useful.


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 29, 2021)

Obi-Wan Spaghetti said:


> i was wodering why won't they make an instr. option with 1 velocity layer(like mf?) for legatos?


don't you get that simply by moving the mod wheel and keeping it there?


----------



## rottoy (Nov 29, 2021)

Cinematic Studio Woodwinds, without question, because it's the only woodwinds sample library 
that has a cor anglais that doesn't quack.


----------



## Obi-Wan Spaghetti (Nov 29, 2021)

Soundbed said:


> don't you get that simply by moving the mod wheel and keeping it there?


That's what i hear but with one vel. you don't have to search for it and it's guarantee you won't hear 2 velocity at the same time. I just view it as an other option. Just throwing this out there.
edited: Plus you get to use you're modwheel like you normally would. Just seems like it would be a useful option overall.


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 29, 2021)

gst98 said:


> I don't want to put you off BWW, but of all the sections, ww have the least offerings with probably the most flaws if you compare to the number of string libs on the market. BWW is expensive, and you're mostly buying it for the selection of shorts and trills etc rather than offering you legatos on the level of CSW. I probably won't be satisfied until Voyage ww where you'll get great programming _and_ a great room - unless SF up their game with AR modular.


That reminds me, I should add


Spoiler



Angry Woodwinds, even though it's more of a tongued articulation on every note


 to the list of audio examples.

Flute:
View attachment Angry Flute Corrected.mp3


Oboe, with an extra bit moved down into the instrument's range a bit more:
View attachment Angry Oboe.mp3


(This one's Clarinet in my next post.)

Also we should hear


Spoiler



CSW with low latency enabled, mix mic, Kontakt reverb at 63% which reads as 0.0dB


 for good measure as well.

Flute:
View attachment CSW Solo Flute.mp3


Clarinet:
View attachment CSW Solo Clarinet.mp3


Oboe, with the same part moved a little lower in the range on the end:
View attachment CSW Solo Oboe.mp3


----------



## Trash Panda (Nov 29, 2021)

Obi-Wan Spaghetti said:


> That's what i hear but with one vel. you don't have to search for it and it's guarantee you won't hear 2 velocity at the same time. I just view it as an other option. Just throwing this out there.
> edited: Plus you get to use you're modwheel like you normally would. Just seems like it would be a useful option overall.


Unless the one layer chosen doesn’t match the line you had in mind. I’d rather be able to figure out which dynamic I want and adjust CC11 instead of having it chosen for me.


----------



## Obi-Wan Spaghetti (Nov 29, 2021)

Trash Panda said:


> Unless the one layer chosen doesn’t match the line you had in mind. I’d rather be able to figure out which dynamic I want and adjust CC11 instead of having it chosen for me.


Well of course, you have both options in this scenario.

P.S. I forgot to say earlier that they could use filters to simulate velocity on the 1 vel. instrument.


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 29, 2021)

Here is


Spoiler: that clarinet



Angry Woodwinds Clarinet, where the crossfade between note attack and sustain are audible, which is one reason it might not be well suited to THIS part but it's great for different parts (like shorts for example or maybe this part in a larger context where this crossfade is not audible)


 that I didn't include above due to the 5 attachment rule on the forum.

Clarinet:
View attachment Angry Clarinet.mp3


----------



## scentline (Nov 29, 2021)

All the way up, Berlin WW! 

*Anne Kathrin Dern - Wood Winds part 1*


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 29, 2021)

Here's some


Spoiler: more to compare and contrast!



NI & Soundiron Symphony Series Flute, Clarinet and Oboe Legato with default settings (meaning vibrato and motion are all the way toward the off position ... you can add some vibrato or movement, if you want.



Flute:
View attachment NI & Soundiron Symphony Series Solo Flute Legato.mp3


Oboe: 
View attachment NI & Soundiron Symphony Series Solo Oboe Legato.mp3


Clarinet: 
View attachment NI & Soundiron Symphony Series Clarinet Legato.mp3


----------



## Obi-Wan Spaghetti (Nov 29, 2021)

scentline said:


> All the way up, Berlin WW!
> 
> *Anne Kathrin Dern - Wood Winds part 1*


I think she made that video before CSW was out. Eitherway, BWW sould great for sure. That room...


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 29, 2021)

scentline said:


> All the way up, Berlin WW!
> 
> *Anne Kathrin Dern - Wood Winds part 1*


Yes, this video is part of the reason my interest in BWW was intensified. Which we may have mentioned earlier in this thread, but the thread is getting long now.



Obi-Wan Spaghetti said:


> I think she made that video before CSW was out. Eitherway, BWW sould great for sure. That room...


Yes, she made the video before CSW was released. It also hadn't had any time to "saturate" the pro composer market, of course, and much of her perspective is based on what she sees getting used in the pro studios — and rightly so.

It would be interesting to see her to a review of CSW in the next couple years.

If anyone here has CSW, you can watch the video, pause after each phrase in her demo, and play the same line. I had not done that before, but I'm trying to now. It's interesting that CSW is fairing pretty well especially considering her demo has external EQ and reverb on BWW.


----------



## scentline (Nov 29, 2021)

Obi-Wan Spaghetti said:


> I think she made that video before CSW was out. Eitherway, BWW sould great for sure. That room...


Yeah, very possible, because it seems she loves the sound of the CS libs. I used Berlin WW with my TEControl Breath Controller 2 and I loved it! Here's my original re-score for the animation cue from Spring that I used Berlin WW flute and piccolo patches (2:30-).

Original re-score for a short animation, Spring by Jinho Choi


----------



## scentline (Nov 29, 2021)

Soundbed said:


> Yes, this video is part of the reason my interest in BWW was intensified. Which we may have mentioned earlier in this thread, but the thread is getting long now.
> 
> 
> Yes, she made the video before CSW was released. It also hadn't had any time to "saturate" the pro composer market, of course, and much of her perspective is based on what she sees getting used in the pro studios — and rightly so.
> ...


That's a good point. Check out also the German fellow composer, Nico Schuelle's video.

Cinematic Studio Woodwinds: (not so) Quick look


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 29, 2021)

I don't think anybody added these yet either.



Spoiler



Infinite Woodwinds, the first of each instrument (all have more than one, to build your own ensemble).



All settings are completely "default" exactly as it loads, and no changes to the MIDI.

Flute:
View attachment Infinite Flute 1.mp3


Clarinet:
View attachment Infinite Clarinet 1.mp3


Oboe, with the second half lower in range: 
View attachment Infinite Oboe 1.mp3


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 29, 2021)

scentline said:


> That's a good point. Check out also the German fellow composer, Nico Schuelle's video.
> 
> Cinematic Studio Woodwinds: (not so) Quick look


Yep I'm familiar with his video.  Always interested in Nico's take on things.

Here's mine, fwiw:

EDIT — in an update, CSW got a new feature that is not demonstrated in the video. That feature is the "Low latency" switch I keep mentioning. Basically the new mode can make everything feel super responsive, and on time every time; with no muss, no fuss.


----------



## Obi-Wan Spaghetti (Nov 29, 2021)

Thanks for all these Soundbed. Will try to comeback later.


----------



## scentline (Nov 29, 2021)

Soundbed said:


> I don't think anybody added these yet either.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Beautiful indeed, but I prefer the more density of the Berlin WW sound. Maybe that room sound of CS libs is just not my cup of tea (plus there's a subtle hiss in it). To mellow in my taste. You also mentioned CSS is a sugarcoated sound when you compared it with the SA Chamber strings in your video. Well, everything has its pros and cons.


----------



## Mr Greg G (Nov 29, 2021)

Soundbed said:


> That reminds me, I should add
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> ...


My clipping friend!  
(1st flute)


----------



## gst98 (Nov 29, 2021)

Soundbed said:


> Here is
> 
> 
> Spoiler: that clarinet
> ...


I'm really surprised how lyrical AWW sounds, shows how good the playability is. Also the tone across the board is amazing - he did a great job engineering this one.


----------



## muziksculp (Nov 29, 2021)

Soundbed said:


> CSW got a new feature that is not demonstrated in the video. That feature is the "Low latency" switch I keep mentioning. Basically the new mode can make everything feel super responsive, and on time every time; with no muss, no fuss.


Yes, it surely makes playing much more responsive, and the legato quality is still very good.

Looking forward to having the Low-Latency mode added to CSS, CSSS, CSB, in the upcoming update, hopefully these updates will be released during December, plus bug fixes for CSW. I doubt they will have CSP. ready this year.


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 29, 2021)

Mr Pringles said:


> My clipping friend!
> (1st flute)


My QA tech is fired!

EDIT: ok it's fixed now, @Mr Pringles


----------



## Trash Panda (Nov 29, 2021)

muziksculp said:


> Yes, it surely makes playing much more responsive, and the legato quality is still very good.
> 
> Looking forward to having the Low-Latency mode added to CSS, CSSS, CSB, in the upcoming update, hopefully these updates will be released during December, plus bug fixes for CSW. I doubt they will have CSP. ready this year.


I doubt we will see any CSS/CSSS/CSB/CSW updates during December based on past history.


----------



## muziksculp (Nov 29, 2021)

Trash Panda said:


> I doubt we will see any CSS/CSSS/CSB/CSW updates during December based on past history.


I hope you are wrong.


----------



## Trash Panda (Nov 29, 2021)

muziksculp said:


> I hope you are wrong.


You and me both. You and me both.


----------



## muziksculp (Nov 29, 2021)

Trash Panda said:


> You and me both. You and me both.


DECEMBER !


----------



## Christopher Rocky (Nov 29, 2021)

Mr Pringles said:


> If only their Strings library was half as good as their Brass and Woodwinds counterpart!!


They have some pretty big string updates coming I think, the rumoured pro versions! what about solo strings though? I actually really like it, I end up using it a lot because it layers so well with anything.

@Soundbed thanks so much for the examples and the video! so when your programming, would you mainly use the 220ms legato for exposed lines? it doesnt make the transition slower, but makes it more realistic? or would you tailer every velocity for the line?


Jonathan Moray said:


> @Christopher Rocky, can you post an audio example of the phasing problems you're having with IB? I feel as if they are generally minimal and very rarely invasive. Since phasing occurs as a natural phenomenon (but reality is much more complex than recorded audio) it's not inherently bad, but the digital phasing we often associate with misaligned samples is rather horrendous, but I don't get too much of that in IB or IW.
> 
> Here's something I made a while ago when testing out a simple Horns a12 patch to see what it would sound like. No individual lines, just everything played on the same audio track and rendered. It's not the best, but I hear very little phasing, and this was before the big 1.6 update. I could probably get it sounding a bit better if I did it today.
> 
> Sorry to hijack the thread.


thanks for sharing this! I dont own IB or IW, I was merely echoing the concern that others are talking about that phasing can happen when playing group patches.
So in your experience phasing has never happened for you?


----------



## muziksculp (Nov 29, 2021)

Christopher Rocky said:


> They have some pretty big string updates coming I think, the rumoured pro versions!


Yes, CineStrings Core ver 2 will hopefully be out during December. 

I love the tone/timbre of CineStrings, but they have been unusable for me due to their old scripts for so many years now. The good news is they are updating many of their main libraries during 2022, and maybe some new library releases as well. i.e. CineStrings Pro, Quatre Strings, ....


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 29, 2021)

Christopher Rocky said:


> would you mainly use the 220ms legato for exposed lines? it doesnt make the transition slower, but makes it more realistic? or would you tailer every velocity for the line?


To be honest I don't (personally) use CSS since getting MSS.

And if I did I would make every CSS transition the fastest.

With CSW I use the new Low latency switch, which wasn't available when my first video was made.

The extra transition speeds are an amazing feat of scripting and editing and meticulous preparation. But I think it was an "intermediary" technology.

MSS helped demonstrate that you can quantize everything while having a nice long predelay and all the transitions (slow or fast based on the part) can be auto-calculated within the instrument. I'm assuming CSS will introduce a similar feature at some point.


----------



## Mr Greg G (Nov 29, 2021)

Christopher Rocky said:


> They have some pretty big string updates coming I think, the rumoured pro versions! what about solo strings though? I actually really like it, I end up using it a lot because it layers so well with anything.


They do sound good, even though they lack low dynamics. But my main gripe with Cinestrings Solo is that there is no legato, just _rebow _(don't get me started, rebow is ***not***** a legato!! Don't fall into dev bullshit and call a cat a cat because there is 0 reason not to). (  )


----------



## Jonathan Moray (Nov 30, 2021)

Christopher Rocky said:


> thanks for sharing this! I dont own IB or IW, I was merely echoing the concern that others are talking about that phasing can happen when playing group patches.
> So in your experience phasing has never happened for you?


I wouldn't say that. Phase cancellation happens naturally in real life. Although, the "digital" phasing we hear when two samples are very close in spectral information but not perfect and not far enough apart to be different, is something we don't often hear in real life making it stand out to us.

I have heard it in IB, absolutely, luckily it's often not enough to detract too much from the sound and not much more than in traditional libraries.

The phasing in CSW is probably worse. It doesn't mean it's horrible or unusable and it only occurs under specific circumstances, but you just that you have to be mindful of it and know how to deal with it if it arises, just as with IB. There are many things you can do to minimize phasing in IB.

So, no, it's not that much of a problem even if it does happen and the "digital" phasing is pretty uncommon, to be honest.


----------



## Christopher Rocky (Nov 30, 2021)

@Jonathan Moray thanks for clarifying, I have never had it happen with a library yet for me tbh, if it has I haven't noticed it! XD


----------



## Jonathan Moray (Nov 30, 2021)

@Christopher Rocky, I would be extremely surprised if it hasn't happened, it's just that for the most part, even the "digital" phases is not that noticeable. Most developers try and minimize the phasing in their libraries. There's many types(?) or degrees of phasing and the reason we hear an ensemble as an ensemble is because of the heavy phasing (not sure if that's the word I would use in this context though). If each individual player in an ensemble is inhumanly tight and similar we would get something closer to being in perfect phase and that would just sound bad.


----------



## Christopher Rocky (Nov 30, 2021)

Jonathan Moray said:


> @Christopher Rocky, I would be extremely surprised if it hasn't happened, it's just that for the most part, even the "digital" phases is not that noticeable. Most developers try and minimize the phasing in their libraries. There's many types(?) or degrees of phasing and the reason we hear an ensemble as an ensemble is because of the heavy phasing (not sure if that's the word I would use in this context though). If each individual player in an ensemble is inhumanly tight and similar we would get something closer to being in perfect phase and that would just sound bad.


When I think of phasing i've only come across it from mixing multiple live mics in a room (i've mainly had this issue with drum mics, overheads and high hat mics) The mics all pick up the same sound and cancel each other out, it sounds absolutely horrendous and thin, almost makes you feel sick in the stomach when you hear it. Its easily fixed just using a phase flip button on a channel eq or compressor. This is what I'm thinking of when everyone is speaking about out of phase samples, or am I completely missing what the definition is?


----------



## Trash Panda (Nov 30, 2021)

Christopher Rocky said:


> Thanks for sharing this! I dont own IB or IW, I was merely echoing the concern that others are talking about that phasing can happen when playing group patches.
> So in your experience phasing has never happened for you?


I have the opposite experience with IB/IW ensembles in that there isn’t enough of the natural phasing/interaction that happens with real ensembles, so it sounds more like one big instrument rather than a group. 

You can get around this to a degree with humanization, pitch accuracy variation, unique CC1 data and mic setting variations but it’s still not quite there.


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 30, 2021)

Christopher Rocky said:


> This is what I'm thinking of when everyone is speaking about out of phase samples, or am I completely missing what the definition is?


We’re not really talking about that out of phase, flip the switch so a mic pops back into phase sound.

That’s perfectly out of phase.

We’re talking more like — so close to in tune but not quite — it creates an effect more like a guitar pedal or an organ sound. Maybe thinner or swirling or metallic, depending.

I don’t recall a post where someone said Infinite Brass had phase issues…(?) The demonstration I remember was for phase issues with CSW, where the mod wheel was between two dynamic layers, slightly out of tune with one another, creating a bit of a “chorus” effect on a solo flute (like there were two flutes).

This happens because the solo flute in CSW is not “phase aligned” or perfectly in tune with itself during crossfades and transitions. People don’t always like phase aligned sample libraries either because they come with their own trade offs … the tone tends to suffer at times. And life is tuned out of the samples sometimes, making them sound more “synthy” to some.

Apologies if I’m over explaining.


----------



## Rob Elliott (Nov 30, 2021)

NoamL said:


> Always a continuing experiment, but right now I've got the Spots and OH pushed down by 15! Might be too much...
> 
> I also take the close mic down on the CSB heavy brass (tpt+tbn+tuba). That's where that studio sound comes from.


Many thanks - those are super close to the settings that I have settled on but not so much the OH's pushed down (unless needing a 'soloist') - I'll give that a try. A snap with CC automating the mics. Thanks again.


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 30, 2021)

NoamL said:


> If you want super expressive, progressive-vibrato melodies (that are rather slow) then either SSW or BBW will serve you well, I would give the slight edge to SSW but you have to finesse the samples & programming A LOT more than CSW right now. Maybe they will update the programming in the future.


Do you have or like Spitfire Studio Woodwinds? I've grown more interested in them after hearing examples from @Mr Pringles


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 30, 2021)

PlumeLilas said:


> Sofia Woodwinds


Thanks for this recommendation. I checked these out. They do sound very clean and well scripted. I guess I was interested in Berlin for the "musicality" and some "magic" imparted from really good players in a really nice space. These seem like really clean samples played in a fairly small studio, and edited very accurately, which is not bad but not really what I was looking for from Berlin Woodwinds. If that makes sense.


----------



## AlexSonicsMusic (Nov 30, 2021)

If you go for Berlin WW, make sure you get the Kontakt version. I love the original BWW, then they changed a lot to repackage them as revive which was probably meant to streamline them and make them fit better with the other libraries. But there is an irresistible beauty to the tone of the originals that, I'm afraid, is also not replicated in the SINE version.
The originals sound great out of the box and have a legendary legato. 
If you have other cinematic studio stuff, however, I'd go for that, as they are very well balanced.


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 30, 2021)

I wanted to add this package too. It has (many) more options than the ones I recorded though.



Spoiler: Here's the package and why it's "unfair" sort of ...



8Dio Claire Woodwinds, because it has so so soooo many options for different playing styles and legato types and also "2nd chair" instruments recorded that are a button away, plus it opens really dry so you need to enable other mic positions to get it sounding similar to the others in this thread. So I'll add the other two mic positions and load the following passages for these.

Flute = "legato strong" — it also has "legato lyrical" and multiple styles within plus another flute II
Clarinet = "legato fast" — it also has "legato slow" and multiple styles within plus another clarinet II
Oboe = "legato strong" — it also has "legato lyrical" and multiple styles within plus another oboe II



Flute:
View attachment 8Dio Claire Flute Strong Leg.mp3


Clarinet:
View attachment 8Dio Claire Clarinet Fast Leg.mp3


Oboe:
View attachment 8Dio Claire Oboe Strong Leg.mp3


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 30, 2021)

AlexSonicsMusic said:


> If you go for Berlin WW, make sure you get the Kontakt version. I love the original BWW, then they changed a lot to repackage them as revive which was probably meant to streamline them and make them fit better with the other libraries. But there is an irresistible beauty to the tone of the originals that, I'm afraid, is also not replicated in the SINE version.
> The originals sound great out of the box and have a legendary legato.
> If you have other cinematic studio stuff, however, I'd go for that, as they are very well balanced.


Thank you! I respect your opinion. I still have some time to decide.


----------



## Jonathan Moray (Nov 30, 2021)

Christopher Rocky said:


> When I think of phasing i've only come across it from mixing multiple live mics in a room (i've mainly had this issue with drum mics, overheads and high hat mics) The mics all pick up the same sound and cancel each other out, it sounds absolutely horrendous and thin, almost makes you feel sick in the stomach when you hear it. Its easily fixed just using a phase flip button on a channel eq or compressor. This is what I'm thinking of when everyone is speaking about out of phase samples, or am I completely missing what the definition is?


Well, it all gets kind of muddy after a while. When talking about phase most people aren't talking about the good kind of phase, they are talking about the bad. And that specific sound comes from when the the two waveforms (the phase of the waveforms) is somewhere between the waveforms being perfectly in-phase and out-of-phase.

The most common place you will find this is when it occurs in something like live recording with multiple mics as you said. For example, if you record a guitar with two mics and they are not properly aligned then they will be creating phasing, but if you record a trumpet with a close mic and a surround mic they won't phase very much because only the direct signal from the trumpet in both mics will phase (technically not true, but for simplistic sake, in this case it is). This is because the close mic and surround mic are so far apart spectrally that there's not much similarity to be in-phase or out-of-phase and so it won't create any nasty phasing.

So, that's why CSW (which has a much closer and clearer sound) is more prone to phasing than something BWW (which has a bit more washed out and reverb(y) sound). There are of course other reasons, but that's one. When working with something as abstract as reverb you don't have to worry as much about phasing.

I actually had a few examples laying around from a few days ago where I was testing a few things with phasing just because of IB.

The first example is a reese synth which is basically four-voice of the same sound spread across the stereo field with different pitches and phases. The phase is set as free meaning it doesn't have to start at 0 on each note. Let's say the oscillation cycle is between 1-100 and the phase can be anywhere in between for each of the voices. It will drift in and out of phase in a much more pleasing way and make the sound thick and wide and not especially unpleasing. This could be done better but was only a 10 second job.

Then I play the same thing but have it set to restart the oscillation cycle each time I press a key for each voice so that they all start at 0 and then slowly drift apart because of the difference in pitch. That's why you can hear a pretty noticeable attack on the second example because *exactly *at the start all oscillators are almost perfectly in-phase.

If all the voices would have been perfectly in-phase it would have just made it sound like one voice but four times as loud. Both the first and second are technically phasing but one sounds more pleasant and fat while the other sounds horrible. It's the second example most people mean when they are talking about phasing.

Second example is what I was talking about with the reverb. First I have two of the exact same sound playing perfectly in phase, effectively doubling the volume. Second, they are 10ms out-of-phase changing the sound quite drastically. Third is the same sounds again perfectly in-phase but this time with reverb added to each one. Fourth they are again out-of-phase with each other by 10ms but with reverb.

You can see how going from in-phase to out-of-phase changes the sound quite a bit but if they each have reverb added to them it's not nearly as drastic. Still a big change in this case, but not *as* drastic. In the sample world, this would make them much easier to crossfade between without creating any nasty phasing. While if they were closer miced (like the first two without reverb) you would get some really bad cancellation while crossfading.


----------



## Tralen (Nov 30, 2021)

Jonathan Moray said:


> Well, it all gets kind of muddy after a while. When talking about phase most people aren't talking about the good kind of phase, they are talking about the bad. And that specific sound comes from when the the two waveforms (the phase of the waveforms) is somewhere between the waveforms being perfectly in-phase and out-of-phase.
> 
> The most common place you will find this is when it occurs in something like live recording with multiple mics as you said. For example, if you record a guitar with two mics and they are not properly aligned then they will be creating phasing, but if you record a trumpet with a close mic and a surround mic they won't phase very much because only the direct signal from the trumpet in both mics will phase (technically not true, but for simplistic sake, in this case it is). This is because the close mic and surround mic are so far apart spectrally that there's not much similarity to be in-phase or out-of-phase and so it won't create any nasty phasing.
> 
> ...


It would be interesting to know what would happen by, let's say, having one IB Horn with the default phase added to a second IB Horn that has an allpass filter running with an LFO.


----------



## Christopher Rocky (Nov 30, 2021)

@Jonathan Moray Thanks for the examples, I see what you mean now and understand what you are talking about with the issues with phasing. 

I was imagining what you did with that second synth example, the 2nd note when its perfectly in phase when it cancels out the sound so much that it thins it out.

I understand from the synth world making things out of tune and phase makes things so interesting on a patch, and its pleasant to listen to, we were talking about this a few pages back, others were saying thats why CSW fits with other libraries even if its slightly out of pitch.

@Soundbed thanks for over explaining its much appreciated! :D


----------



## Trash Panda (Dec 1, 2021)

Soundbed said:


> Does anyone have Vento?
> 
> If so, could you run the most basic flute, oboe and clarinet through this midi? (in an appropriate octave)
> 
> I know it might seem silly to some, but it would be nice to have in this comparison, because the "there can only be one" was obviously intended as sarcasm.


No oboes on their own in Vento, so I included the High Winds Ensemble (Flute, Piccolo, Clarinet, Oboe). Vento is a weird one where they went with a more ensemble-based approach. Flutes and Clarinets are the only non-ensemble options.

Flutes:
View attachment Vento Flutes Test.mp3


Clarinets:
View attachment Vento Clarinets Test.mp3


High Winds:
View attachment Vento High Ensemble Test.mp3


----------



## Soundbed (Dec 1, 2021)

Trash Panda said:


> No oboes on their own in Vento, so I included the High Winds Ensemble (Flute, Piccolo, Clarinet, Oboe). Vento is a weird one where they went with a more ensemble-based approach. Flutes and Clarinets are the only non-ensemble options.
> 
> Flutes:
> View attachment Vento Flutes Test.mp3
> ...


HA! Thank you! I was just watching a video and went so far as to delete my post because it seemed ridiculous to include it (with no soloists and no oboe).

But thank you anyway! I think it's nice to have it included for sure.

Many thanks!

Here's a video for anyone looking to hear more of the "traditional" Vento sounds:


----------



## TonalDynamics (Dec 8, 2021)

Akarin said:


> You can't automate BWW close mic anymore... because Sine doesn't support CCs for mic faders.


But seriously though, I never could figure out how to do proper mic automation on CSW.

I've got the faders learned to my MIDI controller, check.

And they move up and down as per the mapping... but the mic channels don't activate?? Apparently there is no way to CC learn the on/off buttons under the faders...

Spitfire works seamlessly in this regard, activating mic channels when I turn them up/deactivating them when I turn them all the way down.

Am I missing something simple here? Manual offers no help 

As for the OP, both libraries are glorious and I have to mirror what another user said, BWW for traditional/massive orchestra score, CSW for more intimate/Studio sound.


----------



## TonalDynamics (Aug 30, 2022)

Jonathan Moray said:


> @Christopher Rocky, I would be extremely surprised if it hasn't happened, it's just that for the most part, even the "digital" phases is not that noticeable. Most developers try and minimize the phasing in their libraries. There's many types(?) or degrees of phasing and the reason we hear an ensemble as an ensemble is because of the heavy phasing (not sure if that's the word I would use in this context though). If each individual player in an ensemble is inhumanly tight and similar we would get something closer to being in perfect phase and that would just sound bad.


This is not the case, in fact ensembles have the _least_ amount of phasing because of how many distinct waveforms (as a result of loads of instruments combining) are hitting the mics at weird angles and also the fact that ensembles tend to be miked at very wide angles thus generally ensuring compliance with the '3 to 1' rule.

E.G., where you can really get into trouble is trying to mix mics that are too close to each other in the stereo field. (Like an OH and a 'ROOM' that are only 5-10' away from each other)

Phasing is really only to do with poorly engineered live performances where there is not sufficient spacing between mics/ mic mixes to generate unique 'enough' waveforms in the appropriate mix channels; when you're hearing a live orchestra there's essentially no phasing.

This is why it's so crucial to hire great engineers for sample libraries!
The amount of poorly recorded 'professional' material is staggering, even at the highest levels.

Also if the players were inhumanly tight they would in theory sound _more_ out of phase; the discrepancies in timing actually prevent any hint of comb-filtering from occurring. (In reality this isn't the case because no two instruments sound exactly alike and no two players play the same note exactly the same)

As a sidenote, Spitfire _finally_ nailed the mic setups with Albion Solstice, with proper close stereo-mics included for once -- explore that library for a masterclass in small ensemble recording.


----------



## Larry Dickstein (Sep 2, 2022)

I’m very interested in purchasing CSW, and after checking out this thread and multiple online reviews of the library from early its release, the above mentioned phase issues are keeping me from putting my $ on it. Has this dynamic crossfading phase issue been resolved or substantially improved by the latest CSW update?

Users of CSW, are you finding this phasing problematic in your work?


----------



## AMBi (Sep 2, 2022)

Larry Dickstein said:


> I’m very interested in purchasing CSW, and after checking out this thread and multiple online reviews of the library from early its release, the above mentioned phase issues are keeping me from putting my $ on it. Has this dynamic crossfading phase issue been resolved or substantially improved by the latest CSW update?
> 
> Users of CSW, are you finding this phasing problematic in your work?


It takes some adjustment at first but it’s not that much of an issue once you spend a little time with it and get to know the sour spots on the mod wheel that cause it. 

It’s also great to lock it to a single dynamic layer and map the mod wheel to expression like a lot of soloist instruments do.

There’s a future update planned for it so it will possibly be even smoother once that releases.


----------



## Larry Dickstein (Sep 2, 2022)

AMBi said:


> It takes some adjustment at first but it’s not that much of an issue once you spend a little time with it and get to know the sour spots on the mod wheel that cause it.
> 
> It’s also great to lock it to a single dynamic layer and map the mod wheel to expression like a lot of soloist instruments do.
> 
> There’s a future update planned for it so it will possibly be even smoother once that releases.


So, you can remove that phasing with careful cc performance when tracking? And get an expressive sounding instrument performance?

Is phasing on all instruments? Worse on some?

Has the CSW update that was released addressed any of this issue?

Thx for your reply.


----------



## Vladimir Bulaev (Sep 3, 2022)

Larry Dickstein said:


> Has the CSW update that was released addressed any of this issue?


Personally, I am currently using the original version 1.0. The reason for this deterioration of the new update 1.3, the main one of which is the repetition of legato and the missing lower layer of pianissimo in the alto flute. Here I describe the problems with audio examples: https://vi-control.net/community/threads/cinematic-studio-woodwinds-1-0-vs-1-3.121328/


----------



## Larry Dickstein (Sep 3, 2022)

Vladimir Bulaev said:


> Personally, I am currently using the original version 1.0. The reason for this deterioration of the new update 1.3, the main one of which is the repetition of legato and the missing lower layer of pianissimo in the alto flute. Here I describe the problems with audio examples: https://vi-control.net/community/threads/cinematic-studio-woodwinds-1-0-vs-1-3.121328/


Did the update address the phasing issue at all?


----------



## Vladimir Bulaev (Sep 3, 2022)

Larry Dickstein said:


> Did the update address the phasing issue at all?


I think it's better to wait for a new update. @Alex W promises to solve all these problems.


----------



## Larry Dickstein (Sep 3, 2022)

Vladimir Bulaev said:


> I think it's better to wait for a new update. @Alex W promises to solve all these problems.


Good idea except not sure if any library is without issues - especially phasing.


----------



## AMBi (Sep 3, 2022)

Larry Dickstein said:


> So, you can remove that phasing with careful cc performance when tracking? And get an expressive sounding instrument performance?


I'd say so. Since you'll likely want to make small leaps on the mod wheel to avoid the phase points it's great to use expression as well to smooth out any volume discrepancies between dynamic layers.



Larry Dickstein said:


> Is phasing on all instruments? Worse on some?


They all seem to be made with the same care for the most part so I wouldn't say one is worse by much, though I find it's most noticeable with the reed instruments given their character (except Clarinet since it has no vibrato) 



Larry Dickstein said:


> Has the CSW update that was released addressed any of this issue?


I bought it post-update so I'm unsure what it was like at version 1.0


----------



## Larry Dickstein (Sep 4, 2022)

AMBi said:


> I'd say so. Since you'll likely want to make small leaps on the mod wheel to avoid the phase points it's great to use expression as well to smooth out any volume discrepancies between dynamic layers.
> 
> 
> They all seem to be made with the same care for the most part so I wouldn't say one is worse by much, though I find it's most noticeable with the reed instruments given their character (except Clarinet since it has no vibrato)
> ...


Thx for your reply. Do find that phasing any worse than other woodwind libs you might use? I find it problematic in SWW and hoping it’s better in CSW esp since the sound of the latter is more upfront, which is what is attracting me to CSW.


----------



## Zanshin (Sep 4, 2022)

Synchron-ized/VI WW doesn’t have a lot of phasing.


----------



## AMBi (Sep 4, 2022)

Larry Dickstein said:


> Thx for your reply. Do find that phasing any worse than other woodwind libs you might use? I find it problematic in SWW and hoping it’s better in CSW esp since the sound of the latter is more upfront, which is what is attracting me to CSW.


Most of my other woodwind libraries are single dynamic layer soloists so I don’t have much to compare since they don’t have crossfading, sorry. (Berlin Soloists, Claire, AI Solo)


----------



## Casiquire (Sep 4, 2022)

Zanshin said:


> Synchron-ized/VI WW doesn’t have a lot of phasing.


I don't own Synchronized but it does sound like it has very little phasing. The VI version, to my ears, has more phasing than BWW and fewer dynamic layers, so between the two my money is on BWW. Synchronized sounds really freaking great though (and we'll have the conversation about VSL's upgrade paths for samples I already bought another day. Hint, it has something to do with why I'm still just on the VI version lol!)


----------



## RogiervG (Sep 4, 2022)

the topic is about bww vs csw, but there is a poll with all kinds of libraries and 13 pages full of discussions on them (all those libs). Did the op forget to adjust the topic title?


----------



## Larry Dickstein (Sep 4, 2022)

Vladimir Bulaev said:


> Personally, I am currently using the original version 1.0. The reason for this deterioration of the new update 1.3, the main one of which is the repetition of legato and the missing lower layer of pianissimo in the alto flute. Here I describe the problems with audio examples: https://vi-control.net/community/threads/cinematic-studio-woodwinds-1-0-vs-1-3.121328/


That's disappointing. Hope that will be fixed in the next update.


----------



## Larry Dickstein (Sep 4, 2022)

AMBi said:


> Most of my other woodwind libraries are single dynamic layer soloists so I don’t have much to compare since they don’t have crossfading, sorry. (Berlin Soloists, Claire, AI Solo


How do you like CSW compared to Berlin Soloists? I check the latter out, as well, and it sounds excellent. CSW sounds like it might be on par with it minus the phasing issue.


----------



## Larry Dickstein (Sep 4, 2022)

Casiquire said:


> I don't own Synchronized but it does sound like it has very little phasing. The VI version, to my ears, has more phasing than BWW and fewer dynamic layers, so between the two my money is on BWW. Synchronized sounds really freaking great though (and we'll have the conversation about VSL's upgrade paths for samples I already bought another day. Hint, it has something to do with why I'm still just on the VI version lol!)


Synchron WW sounds great. Felt it might not be worth the extra $ realism and presence-wise compared to CSW, but I am taking another look at it considering the phasing issue.


----------



## AMBi (Sep 4, 2022)

Larry Dickstein said:


> How do you like CSW compared to Berlin Soloists? I check the latter out, as well, and it sounds excellent. CSW sounds like it might be on par with it minus the phasing issue.


I like CSW much more personally.
Berlin Soloist's legato isn't as smooth as CSW and the vibrato can be a little noisy and abrupt on some instruments.
Berlin Soloist also has phasing on quite a few legato transitions and overall doesn't feel as polished imo.
I have the Kontakt version so it's possible its better in SINE but not sure.

Locking CSW to a single dynamic layer and using close mics is my favorite "soloist" setup since it has a nice progressive vibrato at lower dynamics and avoids phasing entirely.
Claire and AI Solo are excellent as well.


----------



## Larry Dickstein (Sep 4, 2022)

AMBi said:


> I like CSW much more personally.
> Berlin Soloist's legato isn't as smooth as CSW and the vibrato can be a little noisy and abrupt on some instruments.
> Berlin Soloist also has phasing on quite a few legato transitions and overall doesn't feel as polished imo.
> I have the Kontakt version so it's possible its better in SINE but not sure.
> ...


Very interesting. Thx for the info.


----------



## muziksculp (Sep 4, 2022)

I have a feeling that the next CSW update Alex W. will release will be amazing, and make CSW a no brainer woodwind library. It does need some improvements at its current state.


----------



## Larry Dickstein (Sep 4, 2022)

muziksculp said:


> I have a feeling that the next CSW update Alex W. will release will be amazing, and make CSW a no brainer woodwind library. It does need some improvements at its current state.


Gotten that sense, too, considering the quality of the sample library still in its early stage and responsiveness of the company.


----------



## muziksculp (Sep 4, 2022)

Larry Dickstein said:


> Gotten that sense, too, considering the quality of the sample library still in its early stage and responsiveness of the company.


Yup. With the addition of the Two Spot Mics, Low-Latency Mode, Improved Vibrato functionality, fix any phasing issues, and bug fixes that were reported, plus anything else Alex W. would like to improve, be it improved Runs, Shorts, Legatos, ..etc. It's bound to be a Woodwinds Gem Library.


----------



## muziksculp (Sep 4, 2022)

Meanwhile, Let's see what OT will offer for their Berlin Woodwinds Library in terms of Improvements.


----------



## Kony (Sep 4, 2022)

muziksculp said:


> I have a feeling that the next CSW update Alex W. will release will be amazing


When will it be released?


----------



## Larry Dickstein (Sep 4, 2022)

muziksculp said:


> Meanwhile, Let's see what OT will offer for their Berlin Woodwinds Library in terms of Improvements.


Which do you like better now - BWW or CSW?


----------



## Zanshin (Sep 5, 2022)

Casiquire said:


> I don't own Synchronized but it does sound like it has very little phasing. The VI version, to my ears, has more phasing than BWW and fewer dynamic layers, so between the two my money is on BWW. Synchronized sounds really freaking great though (and we'll have the conversation about VSL's upgrade paths for samples I already bought another day. Hint, it has something to do with why I'm still just on the VI version lol!)


Interesting, I guess I just assumed the phasing would be similar for VI and Syz. Beat Kaufmann recently made a similar comment for VSL Solo Strings in one of his video as well.

I picked up BWW last month (and Berlin Perc, Berlin Soloists, Duplex, Muted Horns, Glory Days haha).

BWW vs Syz WW... I feel like BWW is better at blending and related orchestrations straight out of the box. The best blending instruments for Syz WW are in the Syz Single Woodwinds Package addon- the Flute, Clairnet, Oboe, and Bassoon a3 ensembles. Lyrically... I think I still prefer Syz WW especially the unlooped legato arts. Berlin is not far off though.

I've seen Syz WW for sale on the forum here as low as $249, that's really hard to beat for a top, time tested, WW library.

More off topic... I'm excited to see how the VSL silent stage instruments fair in the Berlin Studio plugin coming out next month but I'm well invested to both OT and VSL these days.


----------



## Henu (Sep 5, 2022)

I got some annoying issues with BWW in Kontakt- in many instruments when I switch to staccato in the multi-patches, I get a clear (non-visible on any meters) overload and all sound mutes for a couple of seconds. I have quite a monster computer, so it definitely shouldn't be about that. Does anyone else experience the same?


----------

